Boyhood (2014)

[tawasal]

catastrophic. am i supposed to be impressed that richard dragged around a kid for 12 years to be a prop in a film about nothing whatsoever? oh sorry, it's about life. maybe life is indeed uninteresting and trite, but that ought to spur indictment and motivation to achieve more, not celebration of mediocrity delivered by scene after scene of the most ridiculous cliche imaginable. also, it seems richard sent DNA of his prospective actors to 23andme to determine optimal future photogenicity.

 

1.5/10

I agree with this review, the movie seemed like it had no goal, and we were just watching this boring life with nothing to keep us sitting at that seat. I mean there was nothing interesting about the lead character and I got no reason to be interested in him. He was dull as they get. Why didn't they tell us which year each cut was? it was really hard to follow and it seemed like when it was about to get exciting they would cut to some other year. 

[RobinHood26]

This thread baffles me..... Ok im 21, my best friend just saw this last night txted me saying its a C. The friend I saw it with also gave it a C. This girl from high school just posted on facebook, Its alright. My buddy who goes to film school called it cliched and cheesy. My experimental film buddy Nathan HATED it. Plus this dude from my high school film class back in the day said it was overrated on facebook.

 

Strange that 7 people my age (the age of the lead) all didn't like it. We should connect with it more I would think. 

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

This thread baffles me..... Ok im 21, my best friend just saw this last night txted me saying its a C. The friend I saw it with also gave it a C. This girl from high school just posted on facebook, Its alright. My buddy who goes to film school called it cliched and cheesy. My experimental film buddy Nathan HATED it. Plus this dude from my high school film class back in the day said it was overrated on facebook.

 

Strange that 7 people my age (the age of the lead) all didn't like it. We should connect with it more I would think. 

Honestly, what do your friends' opinions have to do with how other people feel about the film? I mean, why do you think it matters what Nathan or your best friend thought? How are they representative of anybody else's opinions on this forum, in the critical community, or in the GA? You've already made it very clear that you and your friends grade alike and often think alike on a movie, so as far as I'm concerned, these grades are pretty much the opinions of an isolated echo chamber; they are meaningless in the grand scheme of things. And I'm not trying to put your opinion down; you backed up your opinion with strong points, but I don't really understand why you are bringing your friends up to talk about how a "thread baffles" you. And why does this thread even "baffle" you? You already know that Boyhood has near universal acclaim (99% on RT, 100 on Metacritic) so is it really shocking that nearly everyone else has handed the film an A on this forum? Your opinion is the one that should be baffling because it goes against the grain (that doesn't mean it's wrong, but it's the unique one) so why are you claiming that other people's thoughts are so hard to understand?Also, just because the lead is your age doesn't mean that you will connect/relate more to him than people who are older. When I was younger, I read Catcher in the Rye for the first time. I was about Holden's (the main character's) age when I read it, and I found it good, but extremely overrated. Now, as time has gone by, I enjoy it way more. The fact is that as I grew older, I could look back on childhood with a more nuanced perspective, and that perspective helped me look at Holden as a 3-dimensional and strong character, as opposed to how I used to look at him. Just because you meet someone who is your age, looks like you, talks like you, grew up around you, or thinks like you doesn't mean that you two will automatically connect, sometimes it actually takes a little distance (or separation) to be able to relate to someone.And this is assuming relateability (word?) even matters in the grand scheme of things.

Edited August 24, 2014 by Dark Jedi Master 007

[RobinHood26]

Lol not saying your guys opinions are wrong at all, obviously people love the movie, but its EXTREMELY interesting to me that not a single person I know personally even liked this movie. Thats a rare thing. 

 

And why does the thread baffle me? maybe the fact that I don't know a single person who has liked the movie in real life! Then I go online and see its universally appraised. That would shock you too. 0/7 give it a positive review, yet I go online and a see 99%.... its the definition of surprising haha.

Edited August 24, 2014 by Jay Hollywood

[FTF]

Lol not saying your guys opinions are wrong at all, obviously people love the movie, but its EXTREMELY interesting to me that not a single person I know personally even liked this movie. Thats a rare thing. And why does the thread baffle me? maybe the fact that I don't know a single person who has liked the movie in real life! Then I go online and see its universally appraised. That would shock you too. 0/7 give it a positive review, yet I go online and a see 99%.... its the definition of surprising haha.

7 out of like 2 million who have seen the movie is not really a good same size lol...it's an 8.8 on imdb with 21,000 votes so that's a little better I guess...and a similar score with 40,000 user rt votes.

[RobinHood26]

7 out of like 2 million who have seen the movie is not really a good same size lol...it's an 8.8 on imdb with 21,000 votes so that's a little better I guess...and a similar score with 40,000 user rt votes.

You guys... hahahah..... I GET that it has a 99% and 7 out of 2 million isnt alot, but its 7 people I know!

 

Thats all im saying you, wouldn't find that odd!?? & 7 friends IS good sample size. Im not saying any of your guys thoughts about this film are wrong. Im simply saying its odd to me that no one I know likes it thats it. There is nothing to be argued about no point to be made other then I find it odd that everyone I know happens to think the same way about this film or a film in general. 

 

Its like a random imdb fact to me. 

 

 

 

 

 

"im going to predict the future right now.... some other poster is going to quote this and explain to me the metacritc score and how pointless my post was". 

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

Lol not saying your guys opinions are wrong at all, obviously people love the movie, but its EXTREMELY interesting to me that not a single person I know personally even liked this movie. Thats a rare thing. 

 

And why does the thread baffle me? maybe the fact that I don't know a single person who has liked the movie in real life! Then I go online and see its universally appraised. That would shock you too. 0/7 give it a positive review, yet I go online and a see 99%.... its the definition of surprising haha.

Then what should baffle you if your 7 friends and not this thread.

[The Futurist]

I am not judging the film but watching a mundane boy growing up is one the most boring premisses I ve read.We all live a mundane life to a certain exctent, why bother watching a fim filled with things you can see or live every day ?I am not fond of the auteur pretense like " oh, I am gonna make little facts of life look all poetic and resonant".I need a movie to be transcendent, to be larger than life to interest me.But that s just me.

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

I am not judging the film but watching a mundane boy growing up is one the most boring premisses I ve read.We all live a mundane life to a certain exctent, why bother watching a fim filled with things you can see or live every day ?I am not fond of the auteur pretense like " oh, I am gonna make little facts of life look all poetic and resonant".I need a movie to be transcendent, to be larger than life to interest me.But that s just me.

Well, that's cool. But you have to admit that the little moments in life do leave a big impact for a lot of people, as opposed to the larger than life moments. A few summers ago, I took a school trip to Europe. I enjoyed all of the sightseeing and the monuments, but when I look back on the trip, the first thing I remember is how every night, three kids and I spent the entire night telling stories, joking around with each other, and playing games. Those three kids had always been a part of my life, but they had never been close, and they never would be again. But for a few weeks, we all were really close, and it was that interaction that made the trip, not all of the "transcendent" stuff. So if the "little moments are super poetic and important" stuff doesn't matter to you, so be it. I'm not even sure I enjoy that premise. But it is an important premise in the end. 

[Ozymandias]

catastrophic. am i supposed to be impressed that richard dragged around a kid for 12 years to be a prop in a film about nothing whatsoever? oh sorry, it's about life. maybe life is indeed uninteresting and trite, but that ought to spur indictment and motivation to achieve more, not celebration of mediocrity delivered by scene after scene of the most ridiculous cliche imaginable. also, it seems richard sent DNA of his prospective actors to 23andme to determine optimal future photogenicity.

 

1.5/10

 

 

I love your posting.

[MrPink]

Fuck you Jay Hollywood

 

Best part was when Mason said The Dark Knight was one of the three best films of the summer of 2008. Granted, it's the clear #1, but I'll give him a pass.

[The Panda]

You guys... hahahah..... I GET that it has a 99% and 7 out of 2 million isnt alot, but its 7 people I know!

 

Thats all im saying you, wouldn't find that odd!?? & 7 friends IS good sample size. Im not saying any of your guys thoughts about this film are wrong. Im simply saying its odd to me that no one I know likes it thats it. There is nothing to be argued about no point to be made other then I find it odd that everyone I know happens to think the same way about this film or a film in general. 

 

Its like a random imdb fact to me. 

 

 

 

 

 

"im going to predict the future right now.... some other poster is going to quote this and explain to me the metacritc score and how pointless my post was". 

 

No, 7 people is not a good sample size, especially when they are only your friends.

 

You are asking 7 people in a specific area, who are a very specific demographic because they are your friends (you being another person who wasn't fond of the movie).  Also those 7 friends aren't everyone you know, they are 7 of your friends, and obviously you are prone to liking a certain type of people more because that's kind of how all people all, usually your friends have similar interests to you.

 

For example, when Her was coming out a lot of my friends were stoked about seeing it, if I used that anecdotal evidence to predict Her's box office (thinking, well if my friends are stoked everyone else must be also) my prediction would have been around 25m for its opening weekend.  Even though Her and especially The Moon Song were popular among my specific demographic of friends where I lived, it wasn't necessarily huge for the rest of America given its box office.  Obviously it got more traction after Oscar nods through VOD but that was due to major exposure.

 

I'm sorry, but seven of your friends is not in anyway shape or form a good or even passable sample size.  I'd even argue IMDb isn't a good sample size because the majority of its users fall under similar demographics, however it is definitely a better one than 7 friends.

[The Panda]

I agree with this review, the movie seemed like it had no goal, and we were just watching this boring life with nothing to keep us sitting at that seat. I mean there was nothing interesting about the lead character and I got no reason to be interested in him. He was dull as they get. Why didn't they tell us which year each cut was? it was really hard to follow and it seemed like when it was about to get exciting they would cut to some other year. 

 

I think the point (and film itself) must have flown right over your head.

[AniNate]

Why didn't they tell us which year each cut was? 

 

I'm glad they didn't. It would've been way too on-the-nose. I loved the subtle way Linklater indicated the time with the songs and pop culture images (and the Astros actually being good).

Edited August 31, 2014 by tribefan695

[tawasal]

I think the point (and film itself) must have flown right over your head.

No, it was just bullshit. 

[Dementeleus]

No, it was just bullshit. 

 

No, it's called subtlety.  (How would giving the year and/or his age in a lower-third title provide anything meaningful or insightful?)

Edited August 31, 2014 by Telemachos

[tawasal]

No, it's called subtlety.  (How would giving the year and/or his age in a lower-third title provide anything meaningful or insightful?)

Well sometimes I couldn't tell if he was one year older or was still in the same timetable. 

[tawasal]

It was boring as shit and half way through I was just waiting for the movie to end. 

[AniNate]

Well sometimes I couldn't tell if he was one year older or was still in the same timetable. 

 

You figure it out.

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

No, it's called subtlety.  (How would giving the year and/or his age in a lower-third title provide anything meaningful or insightful?)

Plus, the musical cues and conversations often did give away time periods anyway. I mean, we all remember the TDK conversation.