[Vikingatheart]

Quote:

Twilight. 
 
JESUS CHRIST THAT MOVIE WAS DULL. That girl is the most boring character imaginable and the constant blue tintedness annoyed me.

I couldn't have said it better myself. 
 

 

[tdockweiler]

Oh yes, how could I forget "Inception"! It was as if I was forced to endure that movie and I clearly remember wishing I had a remote to fast forward the movie at the theater. Found zero of the story or it's characters remotely interesting. Such a great idea and this is all you could come up with? How do you also make an action scene be so un-exciting and dull? I didn't think that was possible. I wanted to give it a second chance, but didn't bother yet. Feel free to assume I'm a brain dead idiot, but the movie isn't really as thought provoking as it should be. BTW I understand most people like this movie, but I didn't. No big deal.
 
Strangely I'm one who hears of ultra boring movies and then actually try to go and watch them! I wish I was joking. For example, Ebert gave "The Taste of Cherry" about a half a star or something and I could have sworn he called it boring. I saw it and loved it.
 
Usually if my brain gets turned off during a movie and It doesn't have interesting characters I'll find it boring. Sometimes I can just enjoy a popcorn flick without any problems at all.
 
Transformers 2 was OK for the first hour and I kind of liked it, then it just wore out it's welcome and it just got tedious to watch. Once they ended up in the desert I just wanted to leave, but didn't.
 
Strangely enough I find all the Robert Zemeckis 3D movies extremely bad and boring. I don't understand why or how this could be since I must be the only one in the world who hates them. I even absolutely hated Roger Rabbit! Is that possible? I went to see "A Christmas Carol" with my mom and both of us wanted to leave. This is a christmas movie? Seriously?
 
Somehow I haven't seen a movie someone has listed yet that I also found boring. Strange...
 
YES!! I just remembered now the ultra boring movie I nearly forgot about! It's the french film "Summer Hours"! I have no clue how I managed to sit through that entire movie. If you want to watch a movie about trivial things where nothing worth filming ever happens, watch that. Give me an Ozu family drama over that any day. I will point out it does involve things we will all need to deal with sometime and it does make you think a bit, but it's still so dull.
 
And then there is "Wild Strawberries"....

 

[BobSaysHi]

Quote:

 
And then there is "Wild Strawberries"....

I don't get that movie, or that director at all. Boring is the description I would use.
 

 

[wje]

What about Pi ?  Sure, it was by the same producer (Aronofsky) who also directed Requiem for a Dream.  I thought Pi with the frazzled math guy constantly working on formulas in a black and white setting was a bit irritating - even though I watched the whole thing.
 
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004716/

 

[vladimirK702]

Percy Jackson and the olympians = Big Disappointment 

 

[HiGHFLYiN9]

 
Quote:

Oh Hai HiGHFLYiN9!

 

 

[Erik F]

Quote:

And then there is "Wild Strawberries"....

I like Bergman, if I'm in the right mood.  Then again, I was raised Scandinavian, so we have a high tolerance for dull angst

 
So, we have a thread about he most boring movie ever, and nobody's mentioned Manos: the Hands of Fate? 
 
Just as bad (some say worse) would be anything from the Coleman Francis library.  MST3K made them tolerable, even amusing, but without that treatment, they're unbearably dull. 

 

[jax]

Most of the garbage coming out of Hollywood bores me to tears.  For a film that I'm pretty sure 99.99% of the world population would find incredibly dull, I'd point to Andy Warhol's, Empire.
 
 
Quote:

Then again, I was raised Scandinavian, so we have a high tolerance for dull angst

 
Some of my favorite films come from that part of the world (mostly Norway), though I cannot claim blood ties.  I guess it's the angst.  These are at the top of my list:
 
The Celebration, Troubled Water (Erik Poppe), Brothers (the original version), After the Wedding, Insomnia (the original), The Vanishing (original version),

 

[ZeNmAc]

Why all recent movies?  There's a ton of old boring movies.  Older movies move slower anyway, so if it is particularly bad it can bring a whole new meaning to the word boring.
 
Cool hand luke.  Most boring and pointless movie I can remember watching.  It was so boring it was literally depressing.  I looked it up and it's supposedly only 2hrs, but to me it seemed like at least 3.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Easy, "Inception." What a godawful movie. No characters, no plot, no dialog, no excitement, pointless action, and everything is read in the flat affect of a soap opera. I could go on, but Mark Twain's essay about the literary offenses of James Fenimore Cooper (http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/projects/rissetto/offense.html) says it better than I can.

My hate of Christopher Nolan extends to "The Dark Knight," which is awful though not quite as awful as "Inception." At least it has characters we already know through better works. But the pacing is leaden, it's easily an hour too long, has gaping plot holes, zero character development, achingly bad dialog, and (again) everything is rendered in soap-operaesque flatness. Go ahead, compare dialog to "General Hospital" or "The Days of Our Lives." You'll find the same flat, creepily unrealistic delivery from characters. It was a painful waste of time, twice. I actually saw it a second time to make sure I wasn't in a bad mood the first time.

Further, it sucks the life out of Batman. Adam West is, and always will be, Batman. Anyone who disagrees should consider that Bob Kane himself worked on the TV show. Obviously, he had a blast writing it and it was always a favorite growing up. Moreover, Eartha Kitt as Catwoman trumps pretty much everything else.

If I haven't taken enough whacks at the hornet's nest, I'll say that Ingmar Bergman was a god among men. Sure, he doesn't cut every four seconds and have idiot action scenes, but he made masterpieces. I get sucked in every time and linger over the cinematography and deep characters.

Further, older movies are generally better. Slower pacing, more dialog, and adult themes. Most movies today are about children in adult bodies. Horribly shallow and simplistic. I also hate that most movies feel the need to put the highest-paid star in every scene. More a business function than art. Older movies have bigger casts and more complexity and variety.

Not everything has to be an art film, though. "Avatar" works, despite being predictable and having goofy dialog. It works because Cameron spent a lot of time on traditional character development - rarely seen these days. Cameron also spent a lot of time on the visuals. There hasn't been a visually richer movie - Pandora is fantastic and beautiful. Between that and having genuine characters, the movie succeeds.

 

[googleli]

All three of The Lord of the Rings
*duck*

 

[tk3]

I didn't like The Dark Knight much either, despite how well it is received generally.
Mostly because I felt the movie was way longer than it should be, many scenes could've been removed or shortened without taking away from the story.
Also, that car chase scene (which I feel are extremely boring in general) seemed to go on forever.

 

[KingStyles]

The English Patient. zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[gopack87]

Quote:

What about Pi ?  Sure, it was by the same producer (Aronofsky) who also directed Requiem for a Dream.  I thought Pi with the frazzled math guy constantly working on formulas in a black and white setting was a bit irritating - even though I watched the whole thing.
 
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004716/

+1 My friend said it was one of his favorite movies so I thought I'd give it a try but man, that had to be the longest 90 minute movie ever.  Requiem was also terrible.  People are addicted to drugs.  The End.  Also, I loved the filming in "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" but the movie was an hour too long.  Not the most boring but still tedious to get through
 

 

[J W]

Quote:

If I haven't taken enough whacks at the hornet's nest, I'll say that Ingmar Bergman was a god among men. Sure, he doesn't cut every four seconds and have idiot action scenes, but he made masterpieces. I get sucked in every time and linger over the cinematography and deep characters.

 

 
Oh I agree with that. One thing about Bergman is that he made so many great movies. As part of the bonus content on the Fanny and Alexander: TV Version disc (it may be The Magician. . . seen both within the last month so the bonus stuff may have gotten crossed a bit -- what I'm thinking of didn't come from Peter Cowie, anyway, and I think he was used for the bonus content on The Magician so I may be right after all) somebody said in an interview that Bergman was concerned with perfecting each of his films. With theater, this commentator said, Bergman was afforded an off night. Not so with film. And can't forget to mention Sven Nykvist. Bergman movies wouldn't be Bergman movies without that tone.
 
The one movie I've never really liked is The Virgin Spring. Only viewed it once so I may have had a a wrong first impression. Who knows? Oddly enough I just purchased the Eclipse Series 1: Early Bergman, so I'm sure I'll have an opinion of those early works soon enough. Also hoping that the Criterion Collection releases the other early ones. Somebody also needs to release Face to Face.
 
And as much as I can appreciate The Magic Flute I'd be lying if I said I didn't glance at my watch a time or two when I first watched it. More a fault of my not being a fan of operas, though.
 
Might as well add, since I seem to be in rapid-fire mode right now, that anything with Vincent Price is the antithesis to boring. That guy could make anything interesting.