Amazon Business Best Books of the Month STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Starting at $39.99 Luxury Beauty March Birthstone Shop Popular Services _fab _fab _fab  All-New Echo Dot Starting at $99.99 Kindle Oasis GNO Shop Now STEM

The dullest most dissappointing film I've seen in years.

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-24 of 24 posts in this discussion
Initial post: May 27, 2007, 9:34:42 PM PDT
I've been waiting to watch this film since I saw it in the theater as a preview. Being a Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz fan I was excited to see this film being advertised on commercial as "love that spans the end of time" kind of theme. I'm a big movie aficionado and I'm open to just about anything out there. I LOVE MOVIES. After watching this dribbel, I was shocked that this movie was "greenlighted" at all. I guess it pays to be sleeping with an Oscar winner to get something this horrible to be made. It was beyond boring and utterly dull. Please don't think it's because I "just didn't get it". As the others have said .... we got it .... over and over again. It was actually pounded on my head over and over again. All I'm left with after the movie finally ends is how much I want my 90 minutes back. If only I can go back in time ... not unlike the Hugh Jackman character ... transporting myself back in reality telling my self "DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE". You'll regret it.

In reply to an earlier post on May 31, 2007, 2:59:45 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 31, 2007, 3:04:19 AM PDT
Well, can't say the movie left no impression on you.

I was'nt THAT disappointed. Sure, movies which blend/bend time tend to parlay with pretentiousness. Throw in characters' who attempt (with whatever chemistry their skills allow) to tie together a plot that is thin (shallow?) at best.

Not a formula for success in moviedom.

Though your tastes might disagree (maybe not,i checked out your listmania list) this movie reminded me (primarily due to the soundtrack) of the much better (imo) movie 'SOLARIS' with George Clooney.

On a slightly different note, if you enjoy the kinda movie that includes "love that spans the end of time"?......

...I recommend 'ORLANDO' with Tilda Swinton

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2007, 1:31:15 PM PDT
R. Stevens says:
Where to begin. Could you think of something besides the utterly exhausted "if I could only have my time back cliche? I found this movie to be thought provoking.

DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE, will hopefully just make more people intrigued by your flat statement.

This movie, is not for the simple minded. It requires effort from the watcher. If you're looking for a TYPICAL passive love story, I suggest 'Knocked Up'. THat might be more your speed.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2007, 8:10:17 AM PDT
Yup Richard, I agree. Without getting into all the breakdowns' on why the movie worked or did'nt work(?)...It was a daring bit of movie-making and I would like to see more along these lines (and themes).

Refreshing. I felt the chemistry between the two lead characters' worked enough to carry the story. :) (humm

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2007, 10:51:09 AM PDT
B. Bozeman says:
Judi -if you regret watching this movie and find it "horrible" you should now consider going back in time and eliminating this "review".

No interest in the hearafter?
No curiosity about how others picture death or eternal life?
Is this all there is?
Is death a door to the road to awe? Or is it a disease for which there is a cure?
Too busy to take a couple of hours to explore your mind's take on this subject by exposing it to Aronofsky's vision?

This particular work of art is a beautiful and powerful meditation on mortality. It's closest kinship is with What Dreams May Come.

Reflections and meditations on what may come after death are by definition uncertain imagination. No one has returned to tell us with certainty what comes next. Even the religious require faith.

If you are so limited in imagination and curiosity as to find Aronofsky's visually stunning meditation "beyond boring and utterly dull" it would seem prudent to immediately move on instead of wasting your time and ours by 'thinking' enough to post this indictment.

I'm writing this reply in the midst of my fifth viewing of the DVD. Those who brought this movie to light have spent 15 years at it and there is plenty here to ponder. I find it exquisite visually and fascinating spiritually. Then again the eternal question of life after death or eternal life interests me.

I would love to personally thak the makers of this film for their effort and dedication in bring their vision to the screen. These are highly intelligent cinema artists who's effort is to be commended.

It's ambitious and amazing and well worth the time to watch and the money to own. I'm certain that I will watch it often along with What Dreams May Come, Flatliners, Meet Joe Black, Stay, Jacob's Ladder, The Jacket, Contact, Ghost, The Last Temptation of Christ, Faraway So Close, Defending Your Life, Heaven Can Wait, Wings of Desire, the Rapture, City of Angels, The Sixth Sense, and Beetlejuice when I wish to consider my own mind's eye view of what comes after death.

I'm curious about death and the hereafter and how other's see it and this is one of the best and most beautiful films ever made to address the subject.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2007, 12:15:19 PM PDT
Once you realize it's not about love- it's not a love story- you might grasp it a bit more.
That may be the framework but this story is a death story.

The lead character is not consumed with love.. there is no drawn out romantic idealization that pulls on the very core of your heart and makes you oo and aa at the show of acted emotional interplay.

He is consumed with death, her death, leaving himself blind to their love.
He wants to stop death, but the story is a lesson in the beauty and tranquility of death.. how human beings efforts to thwart it are born out of the skewed perceptive that death is something that -needs- to be stopped.

This movie is visually unique, but that takes a secondary seat to its presentation of a higher consciousness about -death-.


In reply to an earlier post on Jul 12, 2007, 9:47:57 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Apr 30, 2008, 4:49:49 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 12, 2007, 10:18:34 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 12, 2007, 10:21:07 PM PDT
"Stanislaw Lem is rolling in his grave"

Considering he's been dead awhile I'd say that's no small feat.

Ken, too bad 'Solaris' affected you so. Take an asprin and watch 'Pay It Forward' for the upteenth deserve it.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2007, 9:19:19 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Apr 30, 2008, 4:49:48 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2007, 10:42:05 PM PDT

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2007, 9:05:21 PM PDT
I hated this movie, and I watched it twice. This is a thin story glued together with great music and cool-but-eaningless special effects.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 3, 2007, 12:06:30 PM PDT
Thank you! I couldn't agree more. Reading the other post made me feel like I was living in another planet. Did I get those pretentious film art buffs riled up or what???

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 13, 2007, 7:07:21 PM PST
Ian Connin says:
lol ok so the story is thin...what is your example of a deep story then? I am almost afraid to ask because I am afraid of how much irony I am going to be slammed with.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 17, 2007, 12:04:03 AM PST
wait!!! I think I want to like this movie, I don't have anything "bad" to say about it. It just really confused, the thing that keeps driving me insane is HOW DID HE END UP IN THE BUBBLE THING?! The only thing I can even guess at it is supposed to represent something else...but what?!

ahhh! I really really want to like this movie! me.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 17, 2007, 10:27:57 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 17, 2007, 10:30:41 AM PST
Jason Smith says:
Wow. It's really amazing that almost every positive review i've seen for this movie, and even the film itself, has been described as pretentious. It is the most original movie i've seen in years, and i think it really just needs some more time to be appreciated. I love it as i also loved requiem for a dream. These are movies that can't really be placed into any particular genre, which is probably something that disturbs a lot of viewers, but i'm not interested in writing reviews to try and change or challenge opinions. Simply put is a treasure of as movie.
As for the story, i am open to the fact that its left for some interpretation. The most straightforward concept is the story in the present is the main plot, while the past is izzy's writing, obviously coping with her condition and putting her life in a creative dramatic perspective. As for the bit in the future, izzy left unwritten for tom to finish for him to attain his own closure.
However, I like to think that from his research with the monkey and the 'tree of life' sample he actually does find a cure for death as he sort of vows to do at the end. He then spends the next 500 years waiting for or actively developing a form of interstellar travel that will allow him to take izzy's tree to xibalba, where again he reenacts the legend of first father, sacrificing himself to create a new world. Probably not aronofsky's concept but he did leave it open-ended for a reason. Also coolest spaceship concept i have ever seen, i LOVE it.
Anyway you look at it, whether you loved it or hated it (which seem to be the only two reactions to this movie) it definitely made everyone think about it long after they saw it. Not many movies have such an impact and for that alone it deserves some level of respect. Overall i'm glad everyone has their own opinions, i wouldn't have it any other way, just try not to hurt yourself with the mild cognitive strain.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 25, 2007, 1:43:57 AM PST
Scott Cheney says:
Ellen M. Delaney. I have to say that I didn't care much for the film, it was presented in a far too abstract way for me to completely understand what the film was about. I was expecting all the different settings and stories to be connected to the love story of the scientist and his sick wife. I had to really rack my brain to try to make sense of the film. Then you go and say something like "it's not a love story, this story is a death story". That got me to stop and think... maybe you're right. Either way, this film is not for the average movie-goer, but more for the individual who enjoys abstract art, and is willing to spend a great deal of time with their chums at Starbucks discussing topics in sociology, theories of the universe, or the supernatural. There I go with stereotypes again. My advice to those of you who haven't seen the film, rent it before you buy it. I will go back again and see if there's more to the film than what I took in the first time. Thanks Ellen for your take on the film.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 26, 2007, 12:36:52 PM PST
[Deleted by the author on Jul 7, 2008, 9:17:58 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 18, 2008, 5:32:49 PM PST
I don't get what Moby floating through space had to do with the other two stories.

In reply to an earlier post on May 29, 2008, 11:10:09 PM PDT
Bella says:
this movie was something a person might be able to make sense of if they were on drugs. i sat and watched this trying to get interested in it and was completely frustrated, then annoyed, then down right pissed off that i spent money on a waste of crap like that. where in the hell do these writers come up with garbage like this? While on acid? We sat, after 30 minutes of trying to make sense of it with the volume down, making up our own script for it. then it became interesting and entertaining....LOL!

I would not recommend you rent this or buy it. If you want to see it...wait until they put it on HBO or better me and i will send it to you completely free!...LOL!

Posted on Sep 20, 2009, 2:45:24 PM PDT
Saw this on cable and am looking to purchase it.

I'll say this: If you don't like/appreciate this movie, it is not the movie that is lacking, it is you.

Posted on Dec 10, 2009, 8:52:00 PM PST
P. Murray says:
This is one of those movies that reminds how dumb the average movie-goer is....

It's an amazing and unique experience.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 14, 2011, 11:18:47 PM PST
K. Black says:
1. I completely disagree with you about the movie.

2. It's spelled "dribble." Also, the word you SHOULD be using is "drivel."

That is all.

Posted on Jul 20, 2011, 6:06:40 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 20, 2011, 9:38:36 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 6, 2013, 7:25:22 AM PDT
SG says:
"requires effort from the watcher" is code for, Bad Movie have been warned...!
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Participants:  19
Total posts:  24
Initial post:  May 27, 2007
Latest post:  Sep 6, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers