First 20 or 25 Minutes So Slow And Boring I Stopped Watching - A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (2015) Discussion

[–] SloppyJ30 10 years ago

Well, if that was your inclination, you probably made the right call. I enjoyed it, but I can't say it gets "better" than the first 20 minutes. That's what it is, and that's all it is. Not your thing; so be it.

-------------------------

I have meddled with the primal forces of nature and I will atone.

reply

[–] sloopydrew 9 years ago

I enjoyed it, but I can't say it gets "better" than the first 20 minutes. That's what it is, and that's all it is. Not your thing; so be it.

I couldn't disagree with the above more. Like the original poster, I was having a lot of trouble with the film for the first 20 - 40 minutes. Unlike the original poster, I don't have the attention span of a drunken hummingbird and can recognize when a film has potential and is shot with skill and likely worth seeing through to the end. Thankfully for me I did keep watching and starting with the scene with the terrified boy she warns not to be bad on, I absolutely loved the movie. If you asked me in the first however many minutes prior to that scene what I rated the film on a scale of 1-10, I would have probably said a 5. If you asked me again after the film finished, I would say a solid 8. I wouldn't discourage people who were initially bored from giving the movie a little more time.

http://www.juicycerebellum.com/movie.htm
Movies, movies, politics and movies.

reply

[–] fede_4488 10 years ago

So you watched Twilight instead? Is that your kind of vampire movie?

reply

[–] synthgod2 9 years ago

Actually The Strain, the TV series on FX channel is more my thing, or Blade with Wesley Snipes. This movie was the worst of independent filmmaking.

reply

[–] freakinflax 9 years ago

How was this "the worst kind of independent film making?" They made a movie with fantastic cinematography, emotions conveyed without words, and a unique vision throughout the film. Something that leaves an impression when the movie is over is actually considered great filmmaking. BUT, you didn't finish the movie, so you can't make assumptions about anything after you turned it off.

reply

[–] Ithilfaen 9 years ago

Thanks for keeping us updated on your activities but I think you're looking for your facebook account or maybe twitter where people might care what you do with your nights?

Other than that, your arguments about the movie are compelling and well worthy of a discussion board. If you don't account for the discussion factor of course.

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

reply

[–] synthgod2 9 years ago

So I'll give my review a second try: "A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night is a slow, boring, mumblecore piece of junk. Another empty, worthless independent film as bad as Cobie Smulders Results or Chris Evans Before We Go. "
You like that one better?

reply

[–] freakinflax 9 years ago

No, your "review" is horrible. First off, the person above made a comment that wasn't entirely clear. Well, if you read between the lines it is. See, that's what happens when people enjoy good movies: they can read between the lines and understand what the characters are going through even when no words are spoken.

What the person above meant was that if you wanted to have a HALF-HEARTED talk about the movie, Facebook or Twitter would be the place because those are areas where you only need to type a few sentences to get your point across. This is a message board, typically meant for people to have discussions on the movie itself. You lack the respect to view the movie in its entirety before talking about it, so we can't have a discussion about the movie with you. The only thing we can discuss is your inability to review a movie.

reply

[–] Revolutionow 9 years ago

Except you didn't watch the movie and aren't qualified to "review" it.

ce n est pas une image juste, ce st juste une image

reply

[–] greeneggsandham4 9 years ago

In the first 20 minutes, we learn all the major characters and what primarily motivates them. We're also very subtly introduced to the film's gender politics. This is the kind of film that requires active watching; not everyone is up to the task.

reply

[–] synthgod2 9 years ago

It's the narrative film equivalent of watching paint dry, which would also require a lot of effort on the part of the viewer to stay interested.
Most people are smart enough to know when they are wasting their time.

reply

[–] KitchenKnives 8 years ago

But few are smart enough to admit their mistakes.

reply

[–] Prismark10 9 years ago

It is a shame when nothing nothing happens for 20 minutes and the director thinks you will keep on watching and praise it on the internet because nothing happens.

It's that man again!!

reply

[–] benman46 9 years ago

You can always tell when you're on an Imdb message board, when some wanker has started a thread saying they stopped watching after 15 minutes or whatever. Pathetic.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tom245-32-153383 9 years ago

Great review.

Maybe for your next review you could write 2 sentences on why you don't like a book when only having read the first page.

This is why I hate IMDB as it gives retards a voice.

I blame social media for numbing down people's attention spans by feeding them information in short and concise ways. Now people (particularly the younger generations) can't fathom watching The Godfather, or any film with character development, slow builds of tone and atmosphere, lots of different layers, film that take their time etc... because its not constantly upbeat and feeding a stream of excitement and pleasurable information straight and directly to the viewer.

reply