I walked out after 29 minutes...

buried

leggo wrote: »

This is hilarious. The OP clearly came on going, "I'm going to say something that's really gonna piss Baby Driver fans off, because that's popular and I felt this way, so they're gonna get so mad...

Hey leggo, I knew nothing about this film, I said that from the outset.
The only person who got P!ssed off was me for having to watch it.
Then when I said that, thats when the baby fans got into a absolute knicker twist.
I reviewed many films on the review thread, both good and bad reviews, all my honest opinion's on the films I've reviewed.

the_pen_turner

Your entitled to your opinion op but nobody could put any value to your review.
Would you say that a meal was horrible after you had the starter. I hope you wouldn't anyway

buried

the_pen_turner wrote: »

Your entitled to your opinion op but nobody could put any value to your review.
Would you say that a meal was horrible after you had the starter. I hope you wouldn't anyway

If the starter is going to have the exact same ingredients as the meal and dessert, then yes, yes I would

jackrussel

hang on - you went to the cinema by yourself, on a Saturday night?

whats really going on here?

deadybai

I hate when people cant differentiate between a 'terrible' movie and a movie they didn't enjoy.

Baby driver isn't for everyone. I thought it was a tad over the top but by no means it's a ' terrible ' movie.

I really disliked Dunkrik but I'm not going around saying it's a bad film. It's fantastic really.

If you want to watch a truly terrible movie watch 50 shades of grey.
To this day the worse movie I've seen. And I have watched some crap over the years.

johnpatrick81

buried wrote: »

If the starter is going to have the exact same ingredients as the meal and dessert, then yes, yes I would

Think it's more same cook/staff involved. Ingredients would be the scene/location/dialogue/songs used etc. :pac:

buried

jackrussel wrote: »

hang on - you went to the cinema by yourself, on a Saturday night?

whats really going on here?

lol WOW! Shock f**king horror!

So now doing things on your own of a Saturday night is now being brought up in a pathetic attempt at infantile ridicule.

johnpatrick81

The username is a cracker though......come on buried.....stop digging :pac:

buried

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

The username is a cracker though......come on buried.....stop digging :pac:

lol Very good JP

Easy Rod

buried wrote: »

Hey leggo, I knew nothing about this film, I said that from the outset.
The only person who got P!ssed off was me for having to watch it.
Then when I said that, thats when the baby fans got into a absolute knicker twist.
I reviewed many films on the review thread, both good and bad reviews, all my honest opinion's on the films I've reviewed.

I was one of the first people to give you stick about your review, I did it because you posted something a bit stupid, no other reason. I have no personal investment in baby driver in the slightest. Your attitude since you've been called out on it has been quite strange.

jackrussel

buried wrote: »

lol WOW! Shock f**king horror!

So now doing things on your own of a Saturday night is now being brought up in a pathetic attempt at infantile ridicule.

no its just the cinema on your own, on a saturday night

pjohnson

I clicked this thread by accident. Didnt plan on reading it but its oscar worthy.

10/10

Buried for best actor in a farce thread?

buried

jackrussel wrote: »

no its just the cinema on your own, on a saturday night

So what?

pjohnson

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

This could be a new thing now. Give a film exactly 29 minutes and then review it.

I recently tried to watch much acclaimed Irish film Mammal. Full disclosure, I gave it more than 29 minutes but it felt more like 7 hours. Not for me.

Can this become a thing please?

pixelburp

jackrussel wrote: »

no its just the cinema on your own, on a saturday night

Nothing wrong with going to the cinema on your own, regardless what day of the week it is, nor should anyone be judged for it either.

buried

Easy Rod wrote: »

I was one of the first people to give you stick about your review, I did it because you posted something a bit stupid, no other reason. I have no personal investment in baby driver in the slightest. Your attitude since you've been called out on it has been quite strange.

The whole thing became quite strange without any interference from me Rod. All I did was say I walked out of a screening because I found the film to be extremely poor, then I got lambasted for it. I'm only standing my ground, but yeah JP81 is probably correct, I'm well below the ground now lol

Sad Professor

buried wrote: »

Didn't start this thread BDP.

Sorry, buried. I've added a note to the first post so people will know you didn't originally intend for this to be separate thread.

TerrorFirmer

While I don't agree that Baby Driver is a bad movie, I can't really understand the problem here. 30 minutes is a very fair allowance for a movie that you personally consider that incredibly poor from the get go. I can't see how anyone who found the first third of the film that intolerably bad would suddenly come around. I've often sat through less, doesn't stop me 'rating' the film.

Sad Professor

I disagree with buried's assessment of Baby Driver but I can't bring myself to judge him. While I rarely walk out of films, the last time I think I did was Pirates of Caribbean 4. It was probably after 30 minutes as well and I'm pretty sure I was on here afterwards telling people what a piece of crap it was.

In the age of streaming, giving a film 29 minutes is actually pretty good. I have a family members who turn off films after 5 minutes.

Frank O. Pinion

My general rule with films I'm hating, is if I'm more than 45 minutes into a 90 minute film, or more than an hour into a 2 hour film, I'll finish it. But if I'm less than 45 minutes into a 90 minute film, or less than an hour into a 2 hour film, with films I'm absolutely hating, I'll stop. I've seen over 3,000 films, I don't have the energy to continue with mediocre crap, with unoriginal plots, that I've seen done better many times.

And in case anyone questions my movie habits, with films I'm enjoying, I'm not checking running times or how long I've been watching at all.

Andy Magic

You should have watched the rest of it, the first 29 minutes were terrible but the rest is quite good. I almost walked out too with a similar opinion of the first 29 minutes

leggo

buried wrote: »

Hey leggo, I knew nothing about this film, I said that from the outset.
The only person who got P!ssed off was me for having to watch it.
Then when I said that, thats when the baby fans got into a absolute knicker twist.
I reviewed many films on the review thread, both good and bad reviews, all my honest opinion's on the films I've reviewed.

They didn't though. I think that's what you anticipated, but that's what made it funny. Nobody got mad. I mean, had you made some salient, educated points but still slapped the movie down people might have got upset because it offends their own view.

I watched 3 mins of game of thrones and it was was the most boring 3 mins of my like 2/10 will not watch again on a plus note I watched 50 mins of the new Spiderman movie and enjoyed that

El Duda

I liked Baby Driver. Very good film.

I did have to turn off Scott Pilgrim though. Not for me at all.

I'm not stupid enough to then post a scathing review of Scott Pilgrim as it clearly is not my cup of tea.

OP. Learn from my post.

exaisle

In support of the OP, I watched all of Baby Driver. I thought it was pure hyped up sh1te. The novelty of the timing of the soundtrack wore off very quickly and there was little else to recommend it. My view wouldn't have changed if I'd watched 29 minutes or the movie in its entirety. I was tempted to leave but it was a choice of standing at a bus stop for an hour in the rain or watching the rest of the movie. It was a close run thing.

I can understand people not liking good movies and people liking bad movies...but to my mind, this didn't have very much to recommend it.

I suppose I just prefer movies with a bit more depth to them.

Outlaw Pete

I keep a digital diary and just searched it for "walked out" and here's the films I apparently walked out of:

Power Rangers.
Skull Island.
Jack The Slayer
Lucy (?)
Hercules.
Nice Guys
Project Almanac
Ride Along II.

Also walked out of The Lobster but only because I couldn't stop laughing at how small the screen was. It was Screen 7, I think, in the Savoy and my projector at home throws a bigger screen ffs. It makes Screen 3 in the IFI feel like the IMAX.

Tbh, I had forgotten I walked out of so many films. You could have waterboarded me and I wouldn't have remembered.... I see a lot of films.

Anyway, don't see the big deal with peoople walking out of a film and saying that up until that point they felt it was crap. It does however exempt such people from having an opinion on the rest of the film though..... but not really the film itself as a whole as I'm one of those people that think that no matter how good the last two thirds of a film are, it has demeaned itself by having a crap beginning.

Sleeper12

It's a bit like a review for a three course meal but you left after the starter.
I haven't seen the movie & I don't doubt that you didn't like the first 29 minutes but in fairness maybe the main course & desert were the best ever?

Nervous Wreck

Funnily enough, I thought Baby Driver was shîte as well but after about a half hour, it really drew me in and I ended up loving it. The opening scene felt so boringly gimmicky that I really wasn't liking the film at all. By the end, my opinion on the movie was so high that I ended up really digging that opening scene retroactively!

I did leave Mad Max: Fury Road after being really bored for the first hour though...

Fysh

I'm totally on board with saying you find a film bad enough to stop watching - I very rarely do that at the cinema because I fairly aggressively filter what I'm willing to watch at the cinema (even when personal recommendations are involved, there's a fairly short list of people who can persuade me to see a film blind if I'm not already interested), but I'm fairly ruthless when it comes to streaming or home viewing.

You can't then have an opinion on the film as a whole, though - just that the bits you saw didn't persuade you to watch the remainder. To this day I haven't seen Raimi's Spider-Man 2, because the first annoyed me and nothing about the second one made me willing to chance my time on it. I can't say anything about the film, other than nothing about it persuaded me to invest the time to watch it. (Ditto the recent Ghost In The Shell remake, for that matter).

I think the crux of it is informed opinion. It's fair enough to have disliked the film sufficiently to have walked out a quarter of the way through (I personally loved it, but tastes vary, etc) but axiomatically that means you can't have an informed opinion on the film as a whole so rating it overall is kind of meaningless. For me, a walk-out/didn't finish viewing film rates a -/5, or maybe Not A Number.

Baby Driver isn't one of them, but I've seen films with significant pacing, tone or narrative shifts at various points in the story that simply wouldn't be apparent if you only saw part of the film, and the absence of which removes your ability to evaluate what the film is doing or trying to do as a whole. Hence, I think, the derision at the idea of a rating for a film you haven't seen in full (as though "hated it enough to walk out" wasn't a clear rating in itself).

tedpan

I couldn't even watch the trailer. Jesus, cliché in so many ways. No way I'd sit through the movie

Erik Shin

"You don't have to eat the whole egg to tell if it's rotten." Joseph Parisi

buried

leggo wrote: »

They didn't though. I think that's what you anticipated, but that's what made it funny. Nobody got mad. I mean, had you made some salient, educated points but still slapped the movie down people might have got upset because it offends their own view.

Hey leggo. I had anticipated nothing of the sort.
I think your actually laughing at some sort of sinister mindset there in the back of your own brain and now you're now trying to project it on to me.
I mean, If I had really wanted to create a total $hitstorm about the whole thing like you're trying to make out like I had it "planned" , wouldn't it have made far more sense to post my review in the film's actual thread?

Sorry to burst your sinister mindset bubble Leggo, but the actual truth of it is this - I wrote a legitimate review about a film I thought was awful, in the thread where I always review most of the film's that I have recently watched. And I've given zero ratings in there before. Alien Covenant for example.
I didn't give that heap of $hite even a number of any sort and there wasn't this level of knickertwisting $hitstorm.
But literally within 2 minutes of posting this new review I had found myself having to defend my opinion on the thing with some really smarmy & really p!ssy posters, some of whom hadn't even seen one minute of this thing let alone the 29 minutes I had! Check this $hit out lego

budgemook wrote: »

You started watching it. I'm sure you understand the difference. Haven't seen baby driver myself but did see Dunkirk.

budgemook literally admits there that they hadn't seen any of it, but at the same time that poster felt they could lambast, ridicule and demean my opinion on the same film that they literally hadn't seen one second of, And you say nobody else got mad?
That's when it actually did get mad, and we all danced with the Devil in the pale moonlight.. But hey , believe what you like. I know I speak the truth about it all for myself, its actually there to see, but I don't expect you to look, agree or believe it, and you don't have to either, and I don't give a $hit.
But don't be trying to project your sinister $hit on to me at the same time. I don't actual be doing what you be thinking. That "salient" enough for you?

But yeah, good idea for a thread anyways, good drama, good craic. And just like Frank said earlier, I'll look forward to hearing tales from others who have walked out of films they find to be really bad. Why not walk out? Why not say so too?
There is some unreal rubbish being made these days so why not walk out of it safe in the knowledge that you're probably dead right in doing so.

NickNickleby

I've no problem with Buried's review, even if it is only based on 29 minutes. If this was a film that might interest me, I'd look it up first to get an idea of what its about. Then I might look at some reviews. If loads of people said they'd walked out after xx minutes, I'd probably give it a miss. If ONE person gave it bad reviews and everyone else said it was great, then I'd probably give it a whirl. Generally, reviews fall somewhere in the middle (like TripAdvisor!!!).

By the way, I sat through ALL of Dune (with Sting in it) and I have to say I was a little disappointed, even though I was a fan of the books. However, my father-in-law walked out of the cinema completely underwhelmed. no, wait, shell-shocked would be a better description. But to be fair, Saturday afternoon shoot-'em-up Westerns were more to his liking. I don't think he ever went to the pictures with me after that. So I had to pay for myself.....

Fair play to you Buried, you gave your opinion AND you also qualified by stating up front that you only lasted 29 minutes. That's good enough for me.

MadDog76

Going to the cinema alone on a Saturday night .......... keeping count (3,000 was it? ) of the movies you've watched .......... keeping a "digital diary" of the movies you've watched ........... there's something seriously wrong here lads!

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

^ What's wrong with keeping count of the films you watch? I use Letterboxd for that very purpose, as do thousands of others.

MadDog76

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

^ What's wrong with keeping count of the films you watch? I use Letterboxd for that very purpose, as do thousands of others.

I was going to give an honest answer to your question but ........... I won't ......... I'll instead just say each to their own, different strokes etc.

Arghus

I willing to bet that that the inital post about going to cinema on your own on a Saturday night was a joke. But considering there's been a total sense of humour failure on this thread so far, it's not that surprising that people got antsy about it.

Frank O. Pinion

MadDog76 wrote: »

keeping count (3,000 was it? ) of the movies you've watched

3,141 to be exact. With the latest being Killer: A Journal of A Murderer, from 1995, starring the fantastic James Woods. Some people collect stamps, I keep a record of the films I watch. In the end, we're all going to have wasted our time with pointless stuff.

CalamariFritti

To be fair to the OP I wouldn't even need 29 minutes. All I'd need is the title 'Baby Driver.' I'd already know then I would't want to watch it. I mean 'Baby Driver'...nothing good can come out of that.

MilesMorales1

MadDog76 wrote: »

Going to the cinema alone on a Saturday night .......... keeping count (3,000 was it? ) of the movies you've watched .......... keeping a "digital diary" of the movies you've watched ........... there's something seriously wrong here lads!

Huh? A lot of people do this, its quite common.

Wombatman

I only read a handful of posts from this thread but I rated it terrible.

pixelburp

MadDog76 wrote: »

I was going to give an honest answer to your question but ........... I won't ......... I'll instead just say each to their own, different strokes etc.

You do know what forum you're posting on, right? It's not exactly a wild, obscure notion that fans of film and cinema might want to write their thoughts somewhere about movies they watch; no more than ... you know... this forum encourages people to do? Or the entire Critical Review industry that exists in newspapers, blogs, TV, radio, podcasts etc. etc.

There's no point being sly or coy; you obviously feel it's odd or wrong to do so, but then you act like it's a radical obscure idea ?

As for the going to the cinema on your own, give me a break. I've absolutely gone to the cinema on my own, because why not? There have been films I wanted to enjoy in the cinema, but didn't know anyone who'd be interested in that sort of film - I'm not going to abstain from something I'll enjoy doing, because random strangers silently sitting in the dark of the cinema might judge me. It's not a night club. :rolleyes::)

Shurimgreat

buried wrote: »

I started watching it, then I stopped watching it because I thought it was terrible. I'm sure you can understand that yourself, never done something similar yourself I suppose?

We've all done it. I've felt like doing it for a couple of movies but stuck it out to the end for some unknown reason. Zoolander 2 was one I should have bailed on early.

I think you know if a film is going to be good or atrocious from early on.

Having said that, some films start bad and improve, usually comedies where it takes time to build up the jokes. I thought CHIPS was a bit like this. No laughs for the first half hour and then a few decent laughs after that.

Frank O. Pinion

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

3,141 to be exact. With the latest being Killer: A Journal of A Murderer, from 1995, starring the fantastic James Woods. Some people collect stamps, I keep a record of the films I watch. In the end, we're all going to have wasted our time with pointless stuff.

Gotta love James Woods, I have a copy of that movie on VHS. His Twitter account is something to behold these days! He reckons modern cinema has been destroyed by liberal tendencies, and I'm thinking he is not far off the money.

I wish I had kept a digital diary of all the movies I've watched, I think its a cool thing to do, something a true film fanatic would only appreciate though.

MilesMorales1

I just walked out of girls trip after 30 or so minutes mainly because it was awful and I could tell it wasn't gonna get better.

budgemook

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I just walked out of girls trip after 30 or so minutes mainly because it was awful and I could tell it wasn't gonna get better.

what rating out of 10 would you give it?

Useful.Idiot

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I did leave Mad Max: Fury Road after being really bored for the first hour though...

I find this mad! I get it's not for everyone but are you bored by pulse-pounding action?

Useful.Idiot

Arghus wrote: »

I willing to bet that that the inital post about going to cinema on your own on a Saturday night was a joke.

Why? What if you want to go see something in the cinema that no one else would go to?

eviltimeban

OP, did you ever see Hot Fuzz, The World's End, or Shaun of the Dead? Just wondering how you rated them.

megaten

I enjoyed baby driver a lot but many of the characters were paper thin.