MovieChat Forums > Lawrence of Arabia (2013) Discussion > Lawrence of Arabia is boring!

Lawrence of Arabia is boring!

posted 10 years ago by peggy714
99 replies | jump to latest

First of all, I know I'm going to get a lot of backlash for saying that Lawrence of Arabia is boring.

It is important to note that I am a huge fan of the classic movies such as Ben Hur, Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind, Dr. Zhivago, etc.

But Lawrence of Arabia is way too long at 216 minutes. Their explanations of the characters could be much shorter.

I do feel bad about not liking this movie because it has a fantastic cast. In fact, some of these actors are my favorites.

For those of you who do like this movie, continue to watch it because I won't.

[–] OldSamVimes 9 years ago

First of all, I know I'm going to get a lot of backlash for saying that Lawrence of Arabia is boring.

The only reason anyone would give you any backlash would be because you framed your personal opinion as a fact.

See what happens when you add the two little words 'to me' to your thread title?

All of a sudden it's impossible for anyone to take it personally.

You're welcome! 

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] chefjoseph 9 years ago

I support an indefinite moratorium on posts that use the sub-mental term "BORING" in place of actual, thoughtful film criticism.

[–] ronfirv 9 years ago

Concur.
It points to poor education. At high school, it was always drummed into us that we must always, always back up criticism with sound reasons. If not, be quiet.

[–] axxonnn 9 years ago

Don't understand this.

It's funny because the tempo of the cuts and location changes is very, very quick - something that seems impossible over a 216 minute runtime and yet is very true.

[–] sanjay_kn 9 years ago

--If you are a woman it is difficult to get the point across! you can never win an argument with a woman.
-- It is the concept aka philosophy of the movie that you got to get it right!
-- 216 wont do justice to the movie. It is supposed to be 4.3 hours long-let there be no doubt about that. I saw nearly 4 hours grind-house and none took a break( a senior saw the movie standing for nearly an hour. he was getting cramps).

-- Another reason is because you are not watching it like the way it should be seen. Big screen 70mm, sound extravaganza like it was seen back in the days.
On small screen you cant marvel all the dance going on the screen and admire the effort it took to put it out there. And the sound is supposed to be loud period!

--And no body could have pulled it off like peter 0 toole. He was born to do that role.for that alone it is worth watching. He showed madness and passion like none other.

-- There is no movie like it and despite all the above if you are still calling it boring, it shows a very very poor understanding of cinema.

[–] ilon 8 years ago

There is no movie like it and despite all the above if you are still calling it boring, it shows a very very poor understanding of cinema.

People can be bored by things they understand.

[–] scorsese-1 9 years ago

Are you kidding me.

[–] Kevin_PSO 9 years ago

It kept me engaged all the way through personally. The length wasn't an issue. A movie can be as lengthy as it wants to be as long as it tells a real story. And by that I don't mean based on a true story. I know it is but even if it wasn't that wouldn't detract from it. Because this film immerses me on a visual, mental, and emotional level. The story's told cinematically in an epic manner sure, but it preserves that human connection through the characters all the way through. I guess the "right" way to feel about a classic film such as this is that it should earn respect for it's accomplishment, but at the end of the day this is just a great story told in a great way. I've seen some really pretentious "classics" with shorter runtimes than this and I found those to be ridiculously boring but I could re-watch the entirety of Lawrence of Arabia in one sitting and it would capture my attention every time.

___
PSN ID: Kev_Cypunk

[–] archmaker1 9 years ago

Dear Peggy, YOU were bored. The movie has no property called boring, because an object or creation can't. What bored you entranced and thrilled others, which is the case for any creation. The rampant use of boring in IMDB reviews and comments is useless and a waste of space. It tells you nothing about the film, but often a lot about the writer.