• squaresinger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Harry Potter 6 for me. I could not get through this movie. I tried it about 5 times so far. Same with the book. I tried reading it at least 10 times including listening to it as an audiobook.

    It’s just insufferable.

    (And don’t worry, Rowling-haters, I of course pirated it except of the copy of the book that I got when I was a kid)

  • trslim@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Blade Runner for me. Great themes, great plot, great visuals and music, horrendously boring and plodding. 2049 was better imo.

  • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 hours ago

    You should watch 2001 A space Odyssey it is exactly like this.

    It is a historical documentary set in the early days of AI and Space Travel before SpaceX and ChatGPT, it’s kinda neet to see how far we’ve came in such a short time though.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    15 hours ago

    If you are a user of any mind altering substances, or have any interest in starting, it might be worth giving the movie or show another try in that state. Assuming your chosen goodies leave you coherent and able to form memories, lol.

    And it’s not just to put you in a good mood, though that certainly helps. Maybe it’s just the spicy neurons in my case, but being high can qualitatively change the experience of how I relate to characters. (not extreme like empathy on / empathy off, sometimes things might just land different)

    • It’s easier to read the subtext and make connections, catch Easter eggs, etc. Although sometimes your brain is just making shit up.

      I got super stoned before I watched RoboCop 2 a few months ago, which I hadn’t seen before. Holy shit the satire is deeply baked into every scene. I was laughing more than I have in years.

  • sachamato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    2001 a space odisey or most of Tarkovsky films (even though I love the concept and I do consider them as groundbreaking for their time)… I can’t stand them. I tried.

  • mavu@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 day ago

    If you don’t care for it, don’t let people make you watch it.
    No one (sane) will go “Oh! you have to go to this 4 hour 17th century italian Opera with me! You will love it!” .

    You don’t “have to” value any kind of art. If you don’t, you don’t. That said, it might be worth trying at least once, you never know if you find something that stays with you.

    • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      “Oh! you have to go to this 4 hour 17th century italian Opera with me! You will love it!”

      So you’ve never been dragged to Swan Lake?

      • mavu@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I personally would probably enjoy it. At least the Ballet part. And i always carry ear buds, so the terrible opera style singing can be dealt with.

    • Katzimir@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think that most of Art needs a bit oft commitment to be consumed and understood, you cannot expect to immediately understand a piece oft Art just because you can see colour and hear sound. It boils down to education, as you need to learn most things in manageable steps. What im saying is: if someone offers to show you something they like, they are likely a good resource to guide you through the experience.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        More likely than the average Joe but guiding, like teaching or storytelling, is a distinct skill. Lots of people are totally blind to their own biases and the hypothetical 4 hour opera without context would definitely make me doubt their advice.

  • brown567@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I feel like a lot of these films are important because they did something first. The problem is that it doesn’t mean that film did it best.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      And then there’s movies like Dr Strangelove, where I had no idea that old movies could be that entertaining still. Though it has been at least a decade since I watched it, I bet it still stands, even if it invented the iconic “ride a nuke like a cowboy” image.

      Also the whole Soviets built a doomsday device but didn’t tell the world about it, which reality copied (eventually they told the world).

      • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I mean it isn’t an automated doomsday device, just some generals in a bunker who could send the command if moscow vanishes, the same way the US president can via the Nuclear Football.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          As I recall, it was a combo of automated and manual and they went public with the info because they lost knowledge of how it all worked.

    • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’ve always talked about The Rolling Stones like this. I respect what they did, but I was born when rock had really gone beyond it. The Beatles too for the most part. Even a lot of '80s punk. I wanted faster, heavier, more technical. All the old stuff just felt basic to me, but I know it’s a matter of perspective.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin, these guys were inventing the sound of rock. I think they’re fantastic musicians. But Rush and Pink Floyd stand out more to me as timeless art.

    • NannerBanner@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      I believe there’s a copypasta/good comment floating around out there from the reddit days that details everything that has been referenced about the godfather films, and so, if you watch many movies that are popular or considered good, you’ve already seen almost everything that stands out in the godfather films. Throw in the great many improvements in cameras, acting methods/filming techniques, and the ‘drift’ that means one generation prefers certain tropes/themes/scenes/actions over others, and of course an older film is going to be less entertaining for us.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s also written for a different time. Shakespeare is the classic example for this problem, where his plots are timeless and his plays are so Elizabethan that they famously bore teenagers forced to read them, yet simultaneously will be adapted into very popular media somewhat regularly.

        • KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          24 hours ago

          I’ve been saying since I was in highschool that Shakespeare should probably be an elective in college, except for maybe Julius Caesar in AP Literature classes. It’s just so far out of date and the teachers aren’t allowed to explain what any of the slang means so it’s just… soulless. If they were able to explain how filthy it is, the kids would probably enjoy it more.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            22 hours ago

            My senior year high school English teacher was allowed to explain the dirty jokes and we loved it. I think it’s a disservice not to do just that. Yes, it can be boring as hell at times, especially when read, but he’s the most foundational author in the English language, and understanding that and why should be part of a high school education. It’s just that you actually have to do it right.

            My teacher began the year telling us that we were 17 or 18 years old and he was going to speak to us like adults and expected us to behave as adults in turn. From there when literature touched on adult subjects like sex and drugs we actually addressed it, including the poem Kublai Kahn which was one of the first poems I actually really liked as a young person. These topics are major parts of literature and culture and I’m frustrated that people seem to think 17 year olds should be shielded from them even if that means that people who only engage in free education don’t get that literature education.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yeah, My kids/teens don’t have the patience for anything old.

          We were used to watching the storyteller unfold the tablecloth, neatly set out the plates, polish all the silverware, light the candles, place the napkins, and even the chairs in anticipation, then clap while they covered the whole meal. We were thrilled to notice how that fork being slightly off snowballed into a murder scene. Nothing exciting happened in the first half of anything while they setup the story.

          You have about 5-10 minutes these days to cast the first hook or they’ll be asking to watch some short form videos.

          • MBech@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            24 hours ago

            I’m fairly sure that just boils down to taste. I’m not here to watch an hour of foreplay through subtle clues, red herrings, and artistic masturbation. Give me some plot and get on with it.

  • FatVegan@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    Ugh, lord of the rings. I tried watching it alone, with friends, with a girlfriend… Nope, just boring

  • M137@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    And then, sometimes, you watch it years or decades later and it clicks. And other times you are just convinced everyone who likes it are saying so because critics like it.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean, which version?

        I almost think the early low budget adaptations are better because of how zany they get with the art and effects.

        The Timothee Chalamet version is just another action movie. But Lynch gets wild with it.

        • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          17 hours ago

          “Just another action movie” but the guy up the comment chain is literally dozing off. Part one actually has very little action in it, most of it is packed landscape shots, politics, and lore dumping. Which is very accurate to the source material. If you dislike Villeneuve’s adaptation, I can only assume you did not love the Herbert books because he was incredibly faithful to the tone, especially for material that was thought to be impossible to adapt to the big screen.

          Lynch’s stuff is simply not comparable because he said “fuck the source material” and just kinda did whatever came to him in some acid trip or other. Fine if that’s your thing but that’s not what Dune is - especially not the first few books.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Any time you put electrical tape on a cat and use it as a prop, I reserve the right to describe the film as low budget

            • lilmookieesquire@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              23 hours ago

              The funny part is that Sting didn’t even know he was supposed to be acting in a movie. He just showed up on the set randomly and just did his regular daily routine.

  • ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I actually watched the Godfather and Citizen Kane. They were exceptionally good films. Citizen Kane in particular was genuinely fascinating.

    They aren’t boring. While I am going to be honest and say that Citizen Kane isn’t something I would put on regularly (even when it comes to movies from the period) anyone telling they are dumb is dumb themselves.

    • Scrollone@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I think our brains are too fried by smartphones that we are not able to enjoy a slow movie anymore.