First 30 minutes was a total waste of time. It was really boring to an extent that my friends and I started chatting about some randomg things. For ex., How to make our wallets less thicker and keeping misc stuff at the same time :)
When they started talking about the game they want to execute, then it got interesting. Good plot in the end. But it got kinda predictive.
Your linguistic ability explains why you found the movie boring. And you probably still have bulges in your wallet pockets anyway.
shareAt the age of 21 I still found this to be one of the best films I have seen. However, I can understand why this film might not appeal to my generation very much. We are brough up to eat our "cheesecake" diet of overblown, simple, and stupid films (like Miami Vice or Bad Boys).
shareThanks Aussie, you give us slightly older folks hope for the new generation. Dare you watch "Long Days Journey into Night"?
shareI have not seen it, but it can make its way into a Sleuth message board, I will watch it.
shareI'm 17 and this movie had me completely, inescapably engrossed the entire time! I thought both Larry and Michael Caine were brilliant, and their interplay was fascinating. I do know some people my age who wouldn't be bothered with such a film (due to lack of big explosions, nudity, etc) but I found it supremely engaging. In fact, I'm coaxing my buddies to join me for a "sleuth" party where they can try and guess what's going to happen next, and we'll see who guesses the most correctly.
I'm determined to cultivate a certain mental capacity and attention span among my friends so they can enjoy expertly crafted films such as this without lapsing into a catatonic state.
Oh there's hope yet!
~SPOON: We ain't no forks!~
Great to see a young person appreciating the brilliance of Olivier and Caine. Good on you for "educating" your buddies into the "real" movie making genius, with a brilliant script/screenplay, Director and of course the actors themselves. Although Caine did the remake in 2007 with Jude Law, a good effort, but nothing like original. The set design was awesom in 1972 version, much more atmospheric...You will find the classic originals are hardly ever remade with any success. It is the original actors' chemistry and cleverness that makes a great, great film such as this one is. Lesser actors trying to emulate the original, never make it, they cannot be "reproduced". Well done!!
shareWatch the movie "Idiocracy" and you'll see why.
share
Like Classic Hitchcock films, this is another masterpiece. Anthony Schaeffer's screenplay was brilliant. Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine's performances were amazing.
Unlike modern silly movies, this movie is also considered as a multilayered masterpiece.
sonysunu, I am agreeing to only half your statement. Sleuth is a multilayered masterpiece, that I agree. But most classic Hitchcock movies are masterpieces, that I do not agree with.
Hitchcock was very Americanized. Unlike some other great directors of his time who were shining bright with their European heritage, Hitchcock had the adapted identity of an American. So his role in the American film industry is naturally overrated and exaggerated. Many of his films were smash hits, but does it make those masterpieces? Daredevil was a smash hit too, a few years back.
I have watched most of Hitchcock's films and usually they are a good watch. But I do not think there are many masterpieces among those; only a few.
This film has much more depth and detailing than Hitchcock films usually had.
I am currently 16 and over the extent of the last four years I have seen Sleuth about four times. It is my favorite film, although I don't believe many others in my class could say the same. Hahaha I forced a friend to watch it once, and he loved it, soaked it up. I was hoping it would have the same effect on everyone, but it seems not.
I have to agree 100% with Aussie that "my generation" was brought up on stupid films. Stupid films, have been encompassed as a whole genre and "style," I guess you can say. It's a shame. Where kids should be growing up watching a balance of intelligent movies and not-so-intelligent but not drivel-type entertaining movies, stupid movies have really corrupted any sort of balance like that. When I have kids, if i do, they are going to be the weirdest kids because their father makes them watch "old" movies. :]
I have tried many times to interest my daughter in old movies, but she just gets so squirmy and sighs these put-upon melodramatic sighs, so I end up letting her leave the room and watch the older movies by myself. Especially if they are in black and white. Maybe she will have better taste when she's a little older, she is ten now.
Good luck with your future kids though.
It is good to see young audience appreciate Sleuth, its an intelligent enttertaining film, unlike many brainless films nowadays.
" I am talking about..ethics "
I agree with your critique of the writer who found the movie boring. I noticed you used the word "probably". He SHE had used that word, I can guarantee she would have spelled it "prolly".
shareDear Jeffthinx. I can't say I agree. If a movie is going to be predictive, it's important to make your wallet less thicker.
shareI am 17 I was 16 when I saw this film and it was my favorite. Although I will say that most of my friend of the same age despise this film and many other greats like Lawrence of Arabia & 400 blows but so do most middle aged people. From my observation it has a lot to do with upbringing, people who are part of the T.V generation tend to have a shorter attention span.
shareUpbringing.
Well, there's a thing!
My Dad, bless him, used to "subject" us to the Sunday afternoon films in the UK: Titfield Thunderbolt, Bridge on the River Kwai, Operation Crossbow, and stacks of others - you know the sort. And we also had Bob Monkhouse presenting Krazy Movies (I think that's right) and the original Randall and Hopkirk (deceased), Persuaders, Champions, Jason King, oops, Department S before that... And then there were the late night hooror movies
But it set a tone for my sisters and I in the 60s/70s which has stuck with us.
The older of my two sisters has a full set of Carry On DVDs, Sharpe DVDs (courtesy of me for a birthday present) and scores of TV shows recorded which she is crazy about.
My youngest sister is utterly crazy about movies too. More modern stuff, though, but I like to think that she picked that up from our Dad.
And for my part, I love movies of every sort. There are some I don't particularly bother with - the more slushy sorts, although I like the Legally Blonde pair.
And for Inheritance' sake I must cite that on Monday 7th May, my wife and my 17 year old twin boy and girl were all sat down avidly watching The Battle Of The River Plate on TV in the lounge whilst I watched in in the kitchen. It's not exactly 17yo fare, is it, which is what I found particularly remarkable.
Which I find quite gratifying. They may enjoy the usual pre-digested stuff that makes its way onto our screen but they also enjoy the harder-to-watch stuff: black and white, or with subtitles, or with more difficult subject matter or more convoluted plots, or where the camera doesn't dwell uncomfortably long on a vital plot hinge.
This is a great film, I loved it. There aren't enough films like this being made anymore.
shareI agree. I thought it was a waste of film.
shareWait, wait, wait... You honestly thought talking about your WALLET was more interesting than this film?! I'm only eighteen, but I love how dialogue based it is. Just because you didn't understand it, you can't write it off.
Ju-Ju beads...? They're sugar puffs!
You now relise any comments you make in future will either be laughed at, deleted or ridiculed. But in saying that, you did receive a lot of comments. Maybe that was your aim in the first place. Wiggles the movie might be more your pace. And again, great English, rael good speeling, hay.
shareAt 15 I don't know how many people my age would watch films like this, but all I can do is pity them, since they all think I'm weird anyway. I like the old and new films, from Citizen Kane to Twister, and that isolates me out of any group I can find. This is a masterpiece.
Last films seen:
Sleuth (1972) 10/10
The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) 8/10
I would be very interested in seeing this movie. Joseph L. Mankiewicz is a great director and I would love to see a film from the later years of his career. I am definitely sure this movie will be better than Olivier and Caine's other teaming for "The Jigsaw Man". Now that movie was boring. Also can't wait to see the upcoming remake with Caine and Jude Law.
shareI can't find The Jigsaw Man, which is a shame. Ah well.
This is the only Mankiewicz film I've seen, but I'm interested in seeing more. All About Eve and 5 Fingers are on the top of my list, though I can't find 5 Fingers on Netflix or the library.
Last films seen:
Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) 6/10
Brief Encounter (1945) 8/10
I don't think "Jigsaw Man" is on DVD but there are plenty of sellers on ebay selling used VHS copies. I just saw a listing:
http://cgi.ebay.com/The-Jigsaw-Man-Michael-Caine-Laurence-Olivier-VHS_W0QQitemZ9110438985QQihZ018QQcategoryZ309QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem
i wouldn't say boring so much as downright awful cinema. Perhaps it works on the stage but it's always a risk with such a static mise en scene. As for the performances: well, there's always a risk factor with Olivier. He does do a lot with his lines but honestly that last word of every sentence bias he has can get tiresome very quickly. I tried to rewatch Rebecca recently and found I couldn't get more than 40 minutes through the film. But mainly, what on earth is the Michael Caine character doing in playing along with the "game" in the first place? Drama most certainly doesn't have to aspire to versimilitude to be convincing but come on, dressing up as the clown etc - you've run off with the guy's wife, Larry's already indicated he's a bit peeved.
For a proper mystery game try The Last of Sheila. Worth watching for Raquel Welsh alone. Now that is an interesting performance. Sometimes to have the right kind of style you have to live a certain kind of life - something completely beyond Olivier.
Hah, same here. I'm also 15 and enjoyed it a lot. Some of my friends consider me strange for watching masterpieces like Midnight Cowboy, Taxi Driver, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's nest, Dog Day Afternoon etc. but I feel sorry for them.
I'm glad there are more people like me who enjoy watching those kind of movies.
I liked this film, I enjoy older films. But I think it has it's weaknesses. It's not as good as a lot of films in the +/- 3 years before/after it were made, like One flew over the cuckoo's nest, The Godfather I & II, A clockwork Orange, Deliverance, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Chinatown, The Sting, The Wicker Man and so on...
But it's good alright. Would place itself in my top 25 from the 70's, maybe even top 10.
But why act like it has no weaknesses? Like some films from the time, it feels like a stage play. In film, we expect the actors to act like it's taking place in real life, like a hidden camera has captured something that really happened.
On stage, we accept (maybe even expect) the actors to talk in a louder, clearer voice than anyone ever does in real life, as to hear what they are saying wherever we are in the audience, and we can accept people talking in a half-sining way, we can accept spontaneous bursts in to dance or song even if it's not a musical, because that's part of the medium, all of those things.
Once upon a time, that was acceptable in film as well. Now it makes those films feel pretty dated. This is one of them... The way they talk and react, these days it would be called over-acting, but I don't feel that it is, I think it's magnificent acting for a play. The way they talk very melodious and every expression is a bit exagerrated... Well it's perfect for a stage in which some of the audience might be sitting 30 metres from the stage, and it works in this film, but it does at least remind me at times that I'm watching a movie, it lessens the chance to get it's audience completely "in" the movie, as in living the movie, feeling like we're there and this is something actually going on.
Also, it being obviously recorded on a stage (sound stage) also contributes to the feeling that it's pretty dated, when you from the beginning really easily see that it's on a stage and the walls are made of plywood/etc. and not in a mansion as it's supposed (set decorating has come a ways) it really feels like I'm watching the recorded video of a stage play.
I think it's wrong of us to deny these flaws just because we like the film. And I think it's wrong of us to disregard anyone who can't like this film because of these flaws as someone with no sense of history or culture, who can't like old films. Because many films made long before this film feels a lot more realistic in sets and acting.
You and me might be able to "think away" those flaws, accept that they weren't at all flaws at the time the film was made, and enjoy the hell out of this gem anyway. But I can understand that not everyone can. I can't shake the feeling that I was watching a recording of a stage play sans the audience at times.
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=20169722
I always thought that this film is supposed to be like that, like a stage play, but I really appreciate your answer on this. Yes, you're right, for me the best films are those with a more sense of reality(like, let's say Mean Streets), but I just can't dislike this film.
What a great post. I appreciate it.
predictive?...
less thicker?...
when i saw 'boring' as the title of this post i was aghast that some rube could attribute that word to this film...
now i get it...
Bored the hell out of me..very lame and old school...
share[deleted]
Old school? Well it was 36 years ago!! I'm sure the people who say that this movie or any movies on TCM are boring have grown up on a diet pf loud ,silly movies w/no decent writing & story lines that are meant to appeal to 12 yr olds. By all means watch those & leave the TCM type movies to those of us who need more than explosions to entertain us.
This might be good as a (VERY british) stage play if you like this sort of long-winded machoism, but it's mediocre as an international movie and feels very dated. The theatrical, unrealistic acting doesn't help to enjoy this on a screen. For not a moment did I actually care about either of these two characters at all. Sometimes it felt like a Monty Python sketch, but unfortunately no such humour.
The plot seems interesting at first even though the introduction is way too long, but after the first twist you know the trick and it becomes predictable. The lack of any action, new characters or some change of scenery soon makes it rather boring to watch until the end, as the movie is also 30-60 minutes too long really.
Many other movies from the early seventies show much better these days, including several masterpieces, because they were made as MOVIES and their directors succesfully explored the fascinating opportunities this medium gives.
7/10
This movie is awesome, one of my all time favs. Boring is what its not, if you found this boring I imagine I could guess what kinda movies you like.............shita ones.
I Said he'l flip ya, flip ya for real.
Let's just say that I think that f.i. Chinatown (1974) is orders of magnitude better than this movie. Or even, The Conversation (1974). These movies were essential for the history of cinema. Perhaps it says something that the directors of those movies went on to have great careers with an awful lot of recognition, from both critics and the audience.
I don't think Sleuth is a bad movie, just not of the class and importance as other top 250 movies. Most of all, I think Sleuth is much better read as a book or watched as a play in the theatre.
[deleted]
I watched this movie this evening and it was so brilliant that I felt like applauding. A great script by Anthony Schaffer and absolutely superb acting by both Caine and Olivier. Loved it and highly recommend it to anybody who wants to see acting at its very best.
share[deleted]