Comments on: Classic movies that don’t work for me

By: Nathaniel

Nathaniel — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:10:27 +0000

I remember seeing Citizen Kane for the first time when I was nine or ten and thinking it was incredibly powerful. I might have even cried. I wonder if those who were bored with it were able to watch it distraction-free. That kind of movie (and I would lump 2001 and Spirited Away in the same category) really works for me when there are no distractions, and I can just get lost is the slow, steady hypnotism of the film. I saw Gone with the Wind around the same time as Citizen Kane and thought it was depressing and miserable (Seriously, what kind of movie ends with a Hero-and-heroine-are-finally-together and they-all-lived-happily-ever-after moment and then GOES ON for another two hours in which hero and heroine have kids, grow to hate each other, and suffer equestrian tragedy?!). But that really works for some people. There really is no accounting for taste.

By: elsalgal

elsalgal — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:23:10 +0000

I have to agree with Eric’s opinion on 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Young Frankenstein. I just didn’t get them, though my husband likes 2001 and all my family loves Young Frankenstein.

A few years ago I decided to see what I’d been missing and watch some of the old classics. Unfortunately, I started with Breakfast at Tiffany’s, and hated it so much that I didn’t watch any more.

Also (please don’t shoot me, anyone) I never saw the appeal of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. I just found it boring.

By: Pumpkin

Pumpkin — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:49:48 +0000

I totally agree about Katherine Hepburn being annoying. The only movie I can stand her in is “The Philadelphia Story” because her annoyingness is cancelled out by the awesomeness of the movie having BOTH Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart. If Grace Kelly had been in the movie their combined awesome glory would have destroyed the camera.

By: AdamOndi

AdamOndi — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 17:54:29 +0000

I recently saw “2001: A Space Odyssey” on cable on one of those HD channels that is starving for content, so they end up showing a lot of HD versions of movies. The first time I saw it was immediately after finishing the book, so it has always made sense. However, I can totally see how it would be completely unwatchable without having read the book. It is visually stunning, but interminably slow. Luckily, I was watching it on my TiVo, and so I just blooped it once to take those scenes at double time, and the experience was vastly improved. Even if the soundtrack becomes silent when you do that. But yeah, at the end where Dave goes into the monolith, and you are teleported into a bad acid trip? WTF?

“Casablanca” and “An American in Paris” definitely get my vote for classic movies that don’t work for me. I only got through Casablanca because the people with whom I was watching it insisted on finishing. Luckily, my wife and I were both bored to tears by “An American in Paris” and we had no problem popping out the DVD and sending it right back to Netflix.

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:01:54 +0000

I liked 2001 but can understand why some people don’t. I really like Bringing Up Baby (my wife can’t stand it). I liked Citizen Kane (but knew too much about it going into the movie. Can you say “Rosebud”). I like the first half of Grease (the second half totally loses its focus) but would never consider it a classic film. I’ve never been able to get through Gone With the Wind (as others have said, the main character was just too unpleasant plus what a downer of an ending!) I like Mel Brooks’ films but they always seem hit and miss to me. I found High Anxiety the funniest (I like Hitchcock). Young Frankenstein does have its moments but frankly I always thought the “Puttin on the Ritz” scene a bit dumb.

We all have our opinions I suppose. My vote for the most overrated classic movie would probably be Singing in The Rain. Before you throw stones, let me say that I really like the film but having heard how wonderful it was, I was a bit let down when I finally saw it. The plot was always a little weak and seemed to me an excuse to string together some very nice songs and dance numbers. But to be fair, I think Jean Hagen (the ditsy blonde starlet) is one of the funniest characters on film.

By: Chloe

Chloe — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:50:33 +0000

I have to say, I fully agree with Jacob M.

By: card

card — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:47:09 +0000

Jenn, those were awesome comments about Gone with the Wind. Ashley does need to hand in his man card.

By: DAN

DAN — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:18:36 +0000

Sweet, my simple e-mail turned into one whole column!!! I’m touched!!!

By: whome

whome — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:42:23 +0000

I always thought 2001 was kind of fun but rather silly and took an awfully long time to say very little, (I had read the book and liked it better, but it was still kind of silly — the sequels were more silly). But I have to disagree with Red about Chariots of Fire (which I think is pretty good) and especially Spirited Away (which I love — but it’s better in Japanese that the English dub).

By: kuri

kuri — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:40:25 +0000

I agreed with you the first time I saw 2001. I fell asleep. Of course, I was six years old at the time. I liked it as a grown-up. Seven Samurai is too long for 21st-century attention spans, but there's nothing in it that could be cut without diminishing the movie. Now Titanic, there's a movie that sucks. I've tried to watch it three times, but I've never been able to sit through it. Everything about it except for Kate Winslet's boobies is awful.