Any intellectuals out there who didn't care for this?

I don't know how we'd qualify intellectuals....I like to think I'm a smart person who knows enough about film, so maybe, whatever...Anyways, I didn't really like it, I had heard rave reviews, I just didn't care for it once I sat down and watched it. I appreciated the long shots, but that was about it. I knew what to expect in a long, drawn out movie, but this one I found quite boring. That's not to say it wasn't done well, I can see where Bela Tarr's reputation comes from

hello i am an intellectual
tbh this film did not resonate with me. in fact i'm surprise you consider it to a difficult watch, i would have thought garbage like this would go down well with the "zack and miri make a porno" crowd

Re the "intellectual" bit, I've got graduate degrees in both philosophy and music theory/composition, but on the other hand, most of the film snobs around here (would) hate my taste in film (and they tend to think I'm a moron because of it). The thing is, though, that while I like a lot of very popular stuff, mainstream Hollywood stuff, silly comedies, etc., I love films like Eraserhead, Wo de fu gin mu gin, Fitzcarraldo, etc. too . . . you can make up your own mind about whether I'm an "intellectual".

However, I pretty much hated this film--I gave it a 3/10. It's not that I dislike all of Tarr's films (he's not a an Ingmar Bergman for me--I dislike and often loathe the vast majority of Bergman's films that I've seen, although I still haven't seen many because of that)--I liked Kárhozat quite a bit, for example (I gave it an 8/10), but this one just didn't work for me. (I still haven't seen Sátántangó, by the way, although I finally have it coming from Netflix and will see it by next week.)

I'm a pretty hardcore subjectivist, though, so I don't think there's a problem with anyone liking it (or not liking it, or whatever).


http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies

Hi. Not only am I an intellectual, but I am tough and cool! I'm also pretty good at shooting basketballs.

I loved this film.

[deleted]

I am the intellectuallest person here. I cannot tell you my IQ because it is a complex quadratic polynomial which would doubtlessly explode the cerebral cortex of some of our more ignorant imdb users. I cannot have that on my conscience--although I am so intellectual that I no longer have a need for a conscience. I am V'Ger.

(By the way, the preceding paragraph was a sarcastic jab at all the folks who are desperately trying to qualify their intellectualism. And yes, I am aware that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, so blow it out your arses, poopypantses!)

That said, I really enjoyed this film, and I'm not sure I understand your criticisms. Could you explain in more detail?

"Overbearing length" is subjective (unless you're defining it to mean 145 mins or longer, in which case we'd have to flush an awful lot of movies). While I agree that repetition can be annoying, I'm not sure where this movie is guilty of it. "Groundhog Day" and "Run Lola Run" and "Rashomon" might be guilty of repetition, but I didn't see that in Werckmeister. Are there any particular repeating scenes you had in mind?

Perhaps your real objection is that the movie didn't hold your attention. That's fair, but again it's subjective. The fault may possibly be in yourself. I'll give you an example: I couldn't stand Leolo which you praise highly. It did not hold my attention because I found the humour to be base and vulgar (how many scenes of fat women on toilets can the viewer take?)--but I admit that this is a subjective reaction. I'm probably a bit of a prude, but I just don't like potty humour.

"Damnation" is another film which I hated because it didn't hold my attention for personal reasons. This is because it seemed random, and randomness doesn't interest me at all. I expect every scene to have a purpose. Werckmeister, on the other hand, was very well planned & orchestrated, and I never got the feeling that Tarr was being overindulgent in portraying the mundane lives of the townsfolk... mainly because the stark contrast of the frenzied climax brought it all into focus.

Despite all this "intellectual" babble, I recognize that certain directors just plain annoy us. Tarkovsky just plain annoys me. My reasons for hating him are based on his offensive interviews and arrogant attitudes, and it spills over into my appreciation (or lack thereof) for his films. Same goes double for Francis Ford Coppola, that fatheaded prick. So if you show me a film of either of these men, I'll probably find it "overbearingly long" but again, it's purely subjective. Could the same sort of prejudice be clouding your analysis of Werckmeister?

This film was badly edited. It was very pretty to look at, but the poor editing and sound took me out of the story. It would have made a nice installation piece at the Guggenheim.

Re: Any intellectuals out there who didn't care for this?
---------------------------------------------------------

Yes.

92/100 from MetaCritic! Wow!