Rant
So everyone knows I wrestled with how much I did or did not like both the new Halloween or The Last Jedi. People are like, go see it a second time, you’ll like it more. It’s true I did but only bc I knew the parts I didn’t like were coming and they didn’t rip me out of the movie as much during the second viewing. Here’s the deal, a movie is supposed to do its thing during it’s run time, not after subsequent run times. If it doesn’t work after that initial run time, that’s it. For those people who say, it’s a fantastic movie, just watch it again. No! Jaws was perfect the first time, as was Star Wars, braveheart, back to the future, the dark knight, the ORIGINAL Halloween, fight club… I’ve also made the argument myself, you can’t catch lightning in a bottle twice… yes you indeed can. The dark knight came after Tim Burton Batman… the Thing came after thing from another world. K, rant over lol. I saw phantom menace 10 times in the theater hoping it would get better… it didn’t lol
I completely agree with you, the more times I saw the new film, it just doesn’t work, it makes me just want to skip the crap and see the good parts
For me it gets WORSE with every viewing, and this is coming from someone who really liked (And still likes) H40. Idk the whole boyfriend/party/drama subplot just doesn’t seem to sit right with me, and the forcefully places humour is trash. I especially hate that Sartain put on the mask. I still like it for everything else though, it had some good parts with Laurie and family.
I have to agree that if your first viewing doesn’t do it for you, then you’ll likely never change your opinion on it. I can tell you from experience that there are just some movies you can watch once, and be blown away by it immediately after watching it, and then there are movies where you can watch it 50 times and still not like it, let alone the first time. To those who say “watch it again”, I say this…there’s a chance you could warm up to it, but in all honesty, you just sat there watching this movie for 2 hours, and didn’t like it. Do you really need to sit there for another 2 hours just to determine if you really like it or not? I say no. Your initial reaction is what matters I think, but there is another side of that coin. In some cases, you can get hyped for a movie, go watch it, and leave loving it to death, but only because of the hype. You watch it again later after the hype has died down, and you’ll be shocked to find how much your feeling towards the movie can change.
I agree with both of your statements
Second viewing may change your opinion, but that could be a rare case. When I first saw Halloween 3 , I was thinking ’ WTF is this". And that’s after watching Halloween 1,2,3 back to back to back on VHS. But I always appreciated the atmosphere, and score to this movie. So the more I watched it, the more I dug it. As I got older, H3 became a "guilty pleasure " of mine, to now where I consider it to be my third favorite Halloween movie.
Yeah, I get that. I think a classic(a movie that will be remembered and loved by many forever) will most likely be loved immediately but others may become a guilty pleasure over time.
The more I watch it, the more disappointed I am with it. Loved the mask, loved JJC as Myers, but that’s about it TBH.
.
I agree 100%! Personally i thought it was a bore to be honest. The sequel better be a hell of alot better.
I loved the movie the first time I saw it and each time since. I am not looking for flaws. Just the overall feeling I get from the movie. It is nothing as compared to Halloween. But then I would have only made the one movie.
I honestly really did at the start… that mirimax intro is pretty haunting but somewhere down the road it lost me a bit but I’m really glad you enjoyed it a lot!
I can see your point, but there have been plenty of movies that I didn’t like the first time, only to like even more and in some cases, love, after more viewings.
The first time I saw the original TCM I gave it a 7/10. I thought it was decent, bit nothing special. Now it’s a 10/10 for me, and one of my favorite slashers of all time. I absolutely love the hell out of that movie.
Sometimes it takes multiple viewings for something about a movie to stick out to you and make you go “ok, this is actually really good”. But the opposite can happen too. You can love a movie the first time, and then not like it on subsequent viewings.
And I’m not sure if you know this, but I heard that when Halloween 1978 first came out, a lot of critics gave it a negative review. But one critic raved about it and told them all “watch it again”, and the rest is history. I wasn’t around in 1978, so I couldn’t tell yu if this actually happened or not, but either way, my point still remains.
Yes, a movie like Jaws or The Dark Knight or Terminator 2, etc…those movies are going to be instantly amazing. Do you know why that is? Because they’re not subtle. They’re in your face, they’re action packed and they check all the right boxes. They’re blockbusters. It’s the subtle, slower paced movies where you may need multiple viewings to get it. The original Alien is one where most people aren’t gonna get it in the first viewing…or the second…or maybe even the third. But the sequel Aliens is pretty much an instantly satisfying film, because it’s not subtle. The Phantom Menace is a terrible example because it’s not a subtle movie, it’s action packed and in your face and the movie just sucks at its base level.
In a genre like horror, where the ingredients to make a good, effective and scary horror film are wildly different than your summer action packed blockbusters, it usually does take multiple viewings to appreciate them. The horror genre uses a lot more subtlety, a lot more atmosphere and tension and has a certain artistry that isn’t really found in those other genres. With Halloween 2018, I think it has that perfect middle ground where certain parts to it are certainly action packed and in your face, but it’s also certainly a film that you should watch multiple times, because there’s a lot of good filmmaking in there.
I respectfully have to disagree. There have been many movies that I have initially seen and didn’t like. Romeo and Juliette with Leonardo DiCaprio was one such movie. Over time and multiple viewings I began to really enjoy the acting on display. I enjoyed that over the bizarre way in which the story was told. But in my view that movie still has tonal flaws which caused me to initially be displeased with it. I also don’t think that blockbusters tick all the boxes or action movies a always hit the mark. The movie you used as an example, Alien was a slow burn. Much like the movie we all love Halloween. That movie is so frightening to many bc the way it is methodically paced. You’re right, most critics did not like Halloween when it was released… those same people probably still don’t like it. The reason it succeeded was that two well established critics, roger ebert and the village voice gave it glaringly good reviews. Then after that spark word of mouth took it the rest of the way. Halloween was very different for it’s time. It brought horror into your neighborhood. Many critics probably didn’t enjoy violence in their backyard at the time. Back to the blockbuster thing. A movie can become a blockbuster for other reasons besides being expertly filmed. It may have a huge fan base already established. Case in point… phantom menace. But a movie can also become a blockbuster bc it’s expertly filmed and new and different… jaws. There are certain things about a film that have to be in place for it to become a universally loved classic. It has to break new ground, have consistent tone, great writing, precise editing, great acting, nuanced direction, and most times and opening and closing that stay with you long after viewing. You’re argument was very well thought out however, good job on your statement!
I think ill have to disagree, though i do see your point. A movie may not work for you for a variety of reasons not just because of the flaws. I mean lets take 2001 space oddyssey- a cinematic milestone in every way but to me the pacing is just molasses in a blizzard. Now- you can chalk it up to my deficit of attention and youre probably right… but i think that if anything illustrates my piint to factor in bot only the craft of the movie but also the audience as well. I mean take a lot of our classics- blade runner if i recall correctly didnt do too hot in the box office and got mixed reviews.
That is definitely true. Kubrick is for sure an acquired taste. But he kind of makes Art house movies for the mainstream too
I agree, and I also wanna make clear the distinction between a movie that you personally enjoy and a movie that you recognize logically as “great filmmaking”. Because sometimes when you watch a movie…those two don’t match.
Take Eraserhead for example. That’s a movie that I am just an awe of with how well its made. There’s so many secrets, so many mysteries, so many little subtle details, people are STILL debating what that movie is even about so many years later. And it’s so fascinating to me. But do I enjoy myself when I sit down to watch it? Honestly no. I just don’t. Your example of 2001 is the same kind of thing. You recognize it for being a work of art, but you don’t exactly enjoy the viewing experience.
It’s interesting to think about, because there’s a lot of people who hold that close minded thought of “because I didn’t have fun when watching a movie it means it sucks”. But here’s an interesting question. When giving a movie a score, what’s more important? Personal enjoyment or logically recognizing how good or bad it is? Are both just as important as the other? If both are subjective, how do you objectively recognize a movie’s strengths and weaknesses? Can you even do that? Because you can say that one camera angle or one scene is brilliant, and I can look at that same scene and go “I don’t like that, I don’t like how they did XYZ”.
It’s interesting to think about.
All true. Very interesting indeed. You know I’ve never seen eraserhead but been told many times I need to. I’m going to have to finally do it. Yeah, Film is very subjective just like all art forms but I also do think that if the craft is done well… my well and your well are going to be different most likely… then your enjoyment of said film will be enjoyable the first time and you won’t necessarily need multiple viewings to enjoy it. It is interesting though that some things are for the most part universally enjoyed by many, such as edge of your seat suspense. Some movies just really hit a cord culturally.
The best music or art does not usually hit you over the head right away, but over time. And those are the albums you end up listening to hundreds of times. Or paintings you sit in front of for hours. The stuff that hits you over the head, often is like a sugar rush and leaves you as soon as you’ve seen it. I can remember first hearing dark side of the moon from outside someone’s house. It seeped into my brain. Same with the Joshua Tree. Kubrick is nearly perfect, almost every movie he made is genius. I have seen 2001 more than 20 times and it still knocks me out. The Shinning, Clockwork orange, Alien, Apocalypse Now, The Texas chain saw massacre, Godfather 2, Halloween. My favorite movies are kind of like, all kinds of disparate pieces of beautiful music come to life.
I think that also depends on what you listen to music for… the sound or the lyrics. I’m definitely much more of a sound person. I of course do appreciate lyrics too but it’s the sound of music that really grabs me. If it’s sound you listen for, I think that’s more of an instantaneous thing. I knew the first time I heard Guns N’ Roses, Nirvana, etc that it would be my fav for years. Btw godfather 2 is absolutely incredible!! Kubrick is meticulous in everything he does and I know he had a vision for eyes wide shut but damn man… for me, that movie made sex the most boring thing on the planet lol. That shot of the ape tossing the bone and that bone becoming a spaceship may be the single best shot in film though! He’s definitely a high ranking artist of his craft!!