At least not any time soon.
Recently, Jay plugged Without a Clue! In this film, Michael Caine plays Richard Kincaid, a.k.a. Sherlock Holmes, and Ben Kingsley plays Dr. John Watson. The premise of the film is that Dr. Watson is the real brains behind the operation and Kincaid/Holmes merely an actor who plays the part of Watson's bumbling sidekick and cover.
The film is good. The acting is good, the dialogue good, the plot good, the cinematography good, the music good. Nothing is necessarily great about this film, but everything is good. It is a good film. It gets a solid B. It is definitely "above average" as far as films go. Watch the first three minutes and decide for yourself if the film looks like it might not be a bad way to spend 2 hours of your time.
But the funny thing to me is that despite my overall approval for this film, I do not wish to purchase it. In fact, I do not wish to see it again anytime soon. And by "soon" I'm talking five, maybe ten years!
Click the title to read on.
I always feel bad when somebody produces a good film but a film nonetheless that I wouldn't want to watch again any time soon. It's almost like it's my fault that their hopes for directorial fame go crashing down the toilet, that their hope for living the life of a Hollywood millionaire evaporates before their very eyes. I can think of different categories for films. They're semi-arbitrary, but I'm sure you'll understand mine and perhaps have similar ones of your own:
1. you wanted to see it again soon after the first viewing
you want to have the liberty of seeing it again sometime in the next 5 years
you own it
2. you wanted to see it again soon after the first viewing
you don't care if you lack the liberty to see it once again for the next 5 years
you own it
3. you didn't want to see it again soon after the first viewing
you may or may not want to see it again in the next 5 years (lump both together)
you own it
4. you didn't want to see the film ever again and you still don't. Not now, not ever!
you own it
5. 1 but you don't own it
6. 2 but you don't own it
7. 3 but you don't own it
8. 4 but you don't own it
For me, examples would be:
1. Back to the Future, Jurassic Park
2. Star Wars: Episode II
3. Ben-Hur
4. Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker
5. Watchmen
6. drawing a blank, sorry
7. Simon Birch, Without a Clue!, Rush Hour
8. some pretty lame movies on Fox. Leprechaun. A movie with four black women who rob a bank. Event Horizon. No thanks. Never again.
Now here's what I want you to notice. #4 and #8 are obviously indicative of films which are either bad, disturbing, or both. Batman Beyond's film is highyl disturbing. Couldn't get certain images out of my head for weeks. Will probab;y never forget certain scenes, ever. Rather ... "scarring," I guess would be the word, for a children's film. But I didn't know that when I asked for it as a birthday present. I found out the hard way -- after watching it. And #8 requires no explanation, lol.
But look at #7. Simon Birch? Great film. Rush Hour? Pretty durn good comedy. Without a Clue? Lovely film! So why the #7 treatment?
That's what drives me nuts. XD It's just ... the films are:
(1) not nearly as impactful on subsequent viewings as they were on the first viewing, so much so that you don't even want to chance wasting 2 hours of your life watching them again shortly after first seeing them
(2) so memorable (which is a compliment, really!) that you don't feel compelled to re-watch them to refresh your memory, either
(3) because of #1, not something you feel compelled to buy soon after video release. Because of #2, not something you feel compelled to purchase ever. The only reason you'd buy it is to support the making of more films like these.
(4) But truth be told, they aren't the sort of films you want to see more of, and so you abstain even from spending your dollar-votes on them. You don't want Hollywood to get the wrong idea. You want more Jurassic Parks and Forrest Gumps and fewer Simon Birches. Even if, sadly, Hollywood misinterprets your dollar-votes and delivers Transformers and Indy 4.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I'm not sure I could banish any films I like to 10 years, but certainly there have been terrible films I never want to see again (Bringing Down The House, the Pink Panther remake...basically most of Steve Martin's latest work...)
I have a pretty awful memory, though, so maybe that helps movies stay entertaining.
Suppose a scale of 1 to 9, 1 being dreadful and 9 being epically awesome.
Suppose you like 365 films, whereby "like" we mean you score them 5 or higher.
Suppose you only watch one 2-hour film a week.
It becomes very easy to see how it's not a horrible idea to say "I am okay with not getting to see this movie for 5 years, maybe even 10 years."
For example (part 1), even if I won't watch Ghostbusters again for another 5 years (now that I've seen it again this summer), I love the film enough that I wouldn't be comfortable forfeiting my right to watch it again.
But say for example (part 2) you ask me if I could imagine forgoing Jaws for 5 years. Yes, I could do that. I like Jaws. I own Jaws. But I haven't watched the film in years, and I probably won't watch it for many years still. It's sort of like Without a Clue in that it's by all means a good film with good acting, good basic plot, etc. but something about it just makes it too dull, too boring to watch a second time in a row.
Post a Comment