MovieChat Forums > The Sand Pebbles (1966) Discussion > I can't stand people my age.

I can't stand people my age.


So, I'm watching The Sand Pebbles one day, and I'm totally engrossed by it, and all of a sudden a couple of my friends show up and want to hang out. I basically told them to **** off, I'm watching a movie. Anyway, I go back to my movie, and they sit down and start watching it with me. For the next hour and a half I have to listen to these two guys bitching about how boring this movie is, and how I never like good movies. So one of them goes to the DVD player and tries to put Happy Gilmore in and I once again have to tell them to **** off. They don't. They just sit there, and tell me how much this movie sucks.

Which brings me to my original point. Why is it that other people my age have no attention span when it comes to movies? It's like they need a movie with either no plot, a ton of CGI, or lots and lots of lame, disgusting jokes to hold their attention. To me, a movie can be over three hours long and still manage to entertain. A movie can have a couple of scenes of nothing but dialogue. A movie can pull off a battle scene with realistic amounts of explosions and fire. A movie doesn't need to go over the top with every single detail in order to hold one's attention.

Maybe this is just a passing thing. Maybe once my friends and I get out of high school we'll all be able to appreciate good movies. But I don't think so. I think that our nation's youth has lost all of it's good taste and intelligence. I don't think that there's a way out of it. A couple of months ago Meet the Spartans was the number one movie in America. In my opinion, this is what politicians should be campaigning about. It's a very pressing issue! I want my president to promise me that he or she will solve this ongoing problem! Am I all alone? Who's with me?

Oh, and I didn't mean to put Happy Gilmore down. I thought it was a fun movie.

Personal philosophy: Clothing optional.

reply

Several years ago, a website had people vote for the 10 greatest films in history (sorry, don't remember the site). The results were broken down by age, teens to mid 20's, mid 20's to 40 and 40 and above. The results were interesting. The #1 movie for the young group was "The Matrix" and other, amazingly, included an Adam Sandler movie. The Oldest group had films like "Bridge over the River Kwai", "Lawrence of Arabia", "Dr Zhivago", "Gone with the Wind", etc. "The Sand Pebbles" is one of my top 10 movies but, after reading the book, I think the screen writers could have done a better job. But, to follow the book more closely, the movie would have to have been 4 or 5 hours long at least. If you have not read the book, may I suggest reading it. It's very, very good and give you more insight into many parts of the movie. Especially the Hoh-mang, Frenchy, Poh-han and Maily friendship.

Sadly, they don't make movies like this anymore. Movies like this would bomb at the box office today and be very expensive to make. The movie going public prefers movies full of CGI and special effects.

reply

"Sadly, they don't make movies like this anymore. Movies like this would bomb at the box office today and be very expensive to make. The movie going public prefers movies full of CGI and special effects."

Well as movies probably they would...but as a cable miniseries? THAT might be worth making...

reply

Sadly, directors don't usually like to retell a story but have to make it "their own". Other movies like "Flight of the Phoenix" and "Star Trek" come to mind. If the Sand Pebbles were to be remade, it would be full of politically correct nonsense as well. Probably have a rap music sound track too. There would also be historical inaccuracies in a remake as well, I am sure and the swearing by the sailors would be full of the F word too. In the book, the sailors used the word "prong" instead of the F word. Richard Crenna, Steve McQueen and Mako would all be hard acts to follow.

reply

Hang in there. Stick to your guns. Be secure that you have a better and more sophisticated taste in films. Sad to say you are right when you talk about people your age and their attention span etc. Unfortunately its a generation that's been raised on reality TV and that has Kim Kardashian and Snooky as role models. The destruction of American youth. But once in a while you do come across young people like you that against all odds have been able to keep some prespective of what quality entertainment is. And that is very refreshing for us "older" folks. You are not alone and in the long run you'll be better off. My nephew is 20 and he sounds to be very much like you. He is able to think with his head and sort through all the crap that is thrown at him by today's entertainment industry. It also has to do I think with your environment and how you were raised and what you were exposed to by your parents. Hang in there. You're doing fine and keep watching good films.

reply

[deleted]

People have short attention spans maybe? Sorry to hear about that though, you need some new friends.

reply

OP Needs new friends because they have have a difference of opinion about a movie...wow we got a real snob over here

I've no need for a sig

reply

I'm responding to an older comment but if you're still looking for replies here's mine:

I am so encouraged to know there are younger people out there who appreciate older movies. It's your friends' loss that they fail to be entertained by quality films with well written screenplays. The majority of today's moviegoing public, including older adults, are basically ignorant when it comes to seeking out good movies. The junk foisted on the american public is accepted by most people as quality entertainment so garbage such as "Meet The Fockers" and countless other films of that ilk become substantial box office hits. "The Sand Pebbles" is a fine movie, thought provoking, superbly produced, epic filmmaking. There are so many great movies out there , silent, foreign, you name it. Your friends will never change, most likely, so be glad you have the intelligence to appreciate good films.

reply

So, I'm watching The Sand Pebbles one day, and I'm totally engrossed by it, and all of a sudden a couple of my friends show up and want to hang out. I basically told them to **** off, I'm watching a movie. Anyway, I go back to my movie, and they sit down and start watching it with me. For the next hour and a half I have to listen to these two guys bitching about how boring this movie is, and how I never like good movies. So one of them goes to the DVD player and tries to put Happy Gilmore in and I once again have to tell them to **** off. They don't. They just sit there, and tell me how much this movie sucks.

Which brings me to my original point. Why is it that other people my age have no attention span when it comes to movies? It's like they need a movie with either no plot, a ton of CGI, or lots and lots of lame, disgusting jokes to hold their attention. To me, a movie can be over three hours long and still manage to entertain. A movie can have a couple of scenes of nothing but dialogue. A movie can pull off a battle scene with realistic amounts of explosions and fire. A movie doesn't need to go over the top with every single detail in order to hold one's attention.

Maybe this is just a passing thing. Maybe once my friends and I get out of high school we'll all be able to appreciate good movies. But I don't think so. I think that our nation's youth has lost all of it's good taste and intelligence. I don't think that there's a way out of it. A couple of months ago Meet the Spartans was the number one movie in America. In my opinion, this is what politicians should be campaigning about. It's a very pressing issue! I want my president to promise me that he or she will solve this ongoing problem! Am I all alone? Who's with me?

Oh, and I didn't mean to put Happy Gilmore down. I thought it was a fun movie.


I think you're to that something which explains a lot about how contemporary movies are designed and why they are promoted over other possible movie projects.

Probably the only way around this is to encourage greater film education among young people, and both government and broadcasters have a significant part to play in that. Parents and others can also assist by deliberately encouraging young people to watch a range of movies from different eras/decades. Another important thing is to encourage a greater interest in history, which helps provide context to a range of films but especially to period type films like Sand Pebbles.

reply

You're too sophisticated for your friends, that's all. Very admirable!

reply

It's like they need a movie with either no plot, a ton of CGI, or lots and lots of lame, disgusting jokes to hold their attention.

I enjoyed reading this thread, and I totally agree with 'possums' that most kids his age are movie illiterates. There are a lot of reasons for that:
1) starting with Speed, producers adhered to the notion that action needs to be non-stop from beginning to end. The idea of starting slowly, building character and suspense, was lost. Directors stopped doing it, and the public stopped expecting it. In a way, it was a cop-out - you could get any actors to sleepwalk through the lines, and just count on the CGI boys in the lab to produce a glitzy piece of cinematography.
2) parents stopped teaching their offspring about the great movies they saw in earlier eras, and just handed their kids 10$ to go see the latest offering at the Cineplex. Kids have no sense of what went before: they are culturally-illiterate. On the other hand, I remember my dad taking me to see 'Bridge on the River Kwai', and commenting at length on the dysfunctional walk of Alec Guiness when he is finally released from the sun-baked prison where he was being held to break his will. Guiness stumbles, but portrays a character trying to keep his dignity. We also watched the Bogart collection (made 10-20 years before my time).
3) everything is handed to kids quickly, with instant-replays and the Internet. kids have not been taught the joy of undertaking something that unfolds slowly. Many are poor readers.
4) Directors are producing low-quality stuff, cutting corners, and NOT using he camera to create mood, or to give the audience that mysterious sense of 'You-are-there'. I always say that the camera is the BEST special effect. That means you mix angles and close-ups to 'tell' a scene. Example: in High Noon, when the Sherrif Kane watches his former girlfriend (Mexican) riding away on a horse-drawn cart, try counting the 'shots' - closeups, opposite angles, long shots for what is maybe a 30-second scene - let me tell you: that is hard work. The actors have to re-assemble for the new shot, the set guys have to
re-configure the props, cameras have to be moved, lighting re-checked, etc. But that effort made those older films so compelling. To the new Directors, it's too much like work.
- Anyway, possum: keep up the good work. No need for you to have a movie-iq of 35 just coz your friends do.

:-) canuckteach (--:

reply