MovieChat Forums > Wrecked (2011) Discussion > Apparently Slow Moving = Boring?

Apparently Slow Moving = Boring?

posted 10 years ago by hypermecha
6 replies | jump to latest

I'm sorry but there is a difference between a movie with a slow pace, and "boring." It seems like younger audiences these days cannot tell the difference. I'm not saying this is the greatest movie ever, or that you're supposed to be on the edge of your seat watching it. It has some flaws, but it was a decent movie, and I didn't have a problem sitting through it. If you were bored with it, that's fine, but learn to tell the difference. It's like people who can't tell the difference between a movie that really does suck, and one that they just don't like very much. There are plenty of movies I don't like, just because they're not my taste, but at least I can tell the difference between those and movies that really do literally suck. A movie doesn't automatically suck just because you don't like it.

Likewise, a slow pace does not automatically mean boring, and if today's movies didn't have edits and cut-scenese every split second for people with attention deficit disorder, you might actually learn to enjoy movies with a slower pace. Calm your minds down & just go with the flow. Learn to be observant instead of expecting everything explained on a silver platter. God forbid you have to use your brain a little bit for your entertainment.

🐯

[–] felstein 10 years ago

hypermecha, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you wrote. In this age of cinematic overkill, a film like Wrecked holds nothing but disinterest for the Transformers/Iron Man/Pirates/CGI/3D/etc crowd (ie. the majority of those going to the movies these days). I personally found Wrecked captivating, precisely because it dared to take its time to unfold, allowing us to focus on Adrien Brody's mesmerizing performance. It is not a perfect film -- the desultory third act needed a little more variety -- but it is the kind of movie I wish there were more of.

[–] DreamsAgain 9 years ago

Well, this movie was slow moving during the first 30 minutes or so, but BRODY is really such a great actor that he kept me want to continue watching. Glad I did.
There were a few scenes in which I questioned how in the World the character could achieve those feats with the broken bones. But as the movie moved on, it became more intriguing.
BRODY kept this movie going. Plus he was in every single scene. He is good!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[–] doubl3 9 years ago

This is one of those movies with a slow pace that IS boring and dumb. I have liked plenty slow paced movies, so assuming people don't like it solely due to pace is a bad assumption. Also why didn't he honk the horn nonstop in case someone could hear it somewhere?

[–] ralph_2ndedition 9 years ago

Excellent post!
Found this captivating, and was actually a bit impressed by the fact that it managed to hold the tension with just the one actor (well, basically) and hardly any spoken dialogue at all.

And just to counterpoint Wrecked, I found 'Man of Steel' exceptionally boring.

[–] DanaShelbyChancey 9 years ago

The only reason for watching, is Adrien Brody, let's just say it! With any actor without his charisma and skills, the movie would be a total loss.

There didn't have to be car chases, but I could have used some more exposition and variety throughout.

[–] lkillen 9 years ago

I found it boring on repeat viewings but not the initial