MovieChat Forums > The Ballad of Jack and Rose (2005) Discussion > Did anyone else walk out of this POS?

Did anyone else walk out of this POS?

posted 19 years ago by nailsinch9
79 replies | jump to latest

I usually NEVER walk out of a movie, but this one was too much.
Other than DDL, the acting was forced and terrible. The plot... what plot?!!?!

I've seen hundreds upon hundreds of student films. Some terrible some great, and this was nothing more than a terrible student film.

The movie tried to be beautiful, and while some of the cinematography was lovely, it was pointless.

I walked out after Rose came down the stairs topless and approached the fat kid.
This was right after she saw her father with the "new woman."

THAT'S the motivation behind this scene? Sorry, but I couldn't suspend my belief enough to think this WOULD actually happen.

This film actually upset me for the fact that it got made. There are some very talented student filmmakers out there, struggling to make a quality feature, but simply don't have the means... and this piece OS got made because of connections.

Terrible.

Thank God I didn't spend a dime on this movie, and I know it will tank.

[–] saranohriz 19 years ago

I liked this film a lot...and had you stayed you might have learned why she did what she did....and in reference to PLOT...is it because there were no explosions or murders? I love to see human nature at work in small and complex ways. That is what this film had going for it...for me. I have hated many movies I was in but I never walk out. An artist's work deserves to be seen from beginnning to end. Granted you didnt like the work but many things happened after you left and the full cycle might have made a difference. Just my humble opinion...oh yeah and I loved the acting too! Sorry no POS here....(though I owned a Ford Fiesta once that we called the POS Fiesta)
SRiz

[–] Superlove999 19 years ago

<is it because there were no explosions or murders?>

Ha!

And I completely agree with you. How can a person give a real opinion on a movie if they can't be bothered to WATCH the entire thing?

Also, I loved this movie too.

___________________
"Don't knock masturbation, it's sex with someone I love." -Woody Allen

[–] Lias 19 years ago

I sat through the whole thing. It was a terrible movie.

[–] samadee 16 years ago

I second Lias.
I wish I had walked out. I could tell very early on that I wasn't going to enjoy it at all.

[–] hillaryjaynes 19 years ago

terrible is right, but instead of walking out i just sat through the whole thing and laughed.

[–] ReganRebecca 19 years ago

I sat through the whole thing and found it to be very mediocre. It was decently made but some of the lines, and the overt symbolism grated on my nerves (as well as the pointless tacked on "two year later" ending"). I have no idea if this is true, but it felt very much like a "first movie". Flawed but ok.

[–] deadlie1376 19 years ago

I agree with Regan, for the most part. I didn't lik ethe way the ending was approached, but I did enjoy the movie. Even if it sucks, you shouldn't walk out, some movies don't get good until the middle, or even the end.

---------------------------------------
I'm super, thanks for asking!!!

[–] sean-355 19 years ago

to the original poster:

the fact that you capitalized the noun "god" renders your opinions void of any relevance to critical thinking about movies and/or anything else.

[–] polexia 19 years ago

sean-355, the fact that you apparently don't understand the definition of noun as a person, place or thing and the rule which states that in English we capitalize names shows that you're ignorant and your opinion doesn't count for squat. God is a proper name, the Name of God the Father as in Father of Jesus Christ and in English, we capitalize names.

Just because you don't believe in God doesn't mean that His Name is incorrectly spelled.

Don't threaten ME with a dead fish!

[–] lknyc 18 years ago

"God is a proper name, the Name of God the Father as in Father of Jesus Christ and in English, we capitalize names."

News flash - not everyone who believes in God believes that he is the father of Jesus Christ. You clearly do not have to be a Christian to believe in God, and it is very closed-minded of you to make a blanket statement like that. Are you aware that not everyone practices the same religion as you? I do agree that "God" should be capitalized, but your point could have been made without excluding all non-Christians.

[–] cold-deer 17 years ago

so um.... is everyone in this thread 12?

or is it just me who's getting that impression?

why not stick to the topic at hand rather than throw around juvenille insults regarding one's grammar or religion - it's only the internet.

we're all allowed to have our own opinions, and those opinions should be respected rather than attacked.

[–] raitmalkin 16 years ago

"Do you have 45 minutes to not talk about the lord?"

You can be upset with whomever you like, for whatever reason you like, but honestly I didn't see anyone jump on your back for being atheist there Seany.
This thread was fine until someone grew bored and wanted to fight over something better left to an anti-religious board.
MOVIE OPINIONS ONLY PLEASE!!!!!

[–] colan 15 years ago

It's "god," because he didn't exist, "god" is just a delusion heaped upon people, we're not born believing in gods, it's merely another way of keeping humans in check and keeping power to the few who supposedly administer it's fiction and yet another way of dividing mankind.

In short, STFU.

[–] superhrogurl 19 years ago

"the fact that you capitalized the noun "god" renders your opinions void of any relevance to critical thinking about movies and/or anything else."

So let me get this straight? You think that someone who believes in God and/or is religious has no right to voice his/her opinions or that even if they do, that their opinions don't count? Did I get that right?

Personally, I am a firm believer in Christ, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus. I liked this movie. I can't say it's one of my favorites, but I did like it quite a bit. Now does my opinion count? I'm assuming you made your previous comment because you liked/loved the movie and wanted to discredit the original poster's comment. Or maybe you just have a problem with Christians in general.

Whatever.

[–] thewinterking 19 years ago

Amen.

[–] SouthernBelleGLS 17 years ago

So quick you guys are to jump onto the religion wagon...
You shoud really read the progression from the first comment about the capitilizations. Though, some authors use that to make a point; Salinger and Camus being prime examlples, but what do I know? I'm an Atheist!
Ha...anyway.
I loved this movie and I think that you had to of had a mind to watch it. You had to THINK. THINK: they are livnig on this remote former commune. The girl has no mind to sex, and when she sees it she reacts straight on instinct. Is it that she truly desires the boy? Is she jealous and angry that her father is showing affection for another woman (I'm not at the incest part yet). Or does she know no other way to react and simply WANTS and CRAVES the attention that she was so desperately lacking?
What's wrong with some films that don't make TOTAL sense? Or is it just that it doesn't make sense to you, or only a select few. Maybe, like some brilliant people are; they made a film aimed toward a certain group of people who they knew would understand. Yeah?
I think the movie made sense. Perhaps it was slow at times, but refering back to another comment, must we have explosions and murder to amuse ourselves?
I haven't watched it in a while, and I only saw it once, so I am going to stop myself from going any further because I don't want to make an ass out of myself.
But, can we please stick to the topic of the movie, and not deities?
Thank you!

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] italianpride17 17 years ago

Ohhh look a typical preachy holier than thou Christian.

Care to explain the priesthood oh do gooders you.

I hate cowards who are scared of the unknown so they take precautions.
God exists but the rest of the Bible is rubbish, fabrication, and tripe.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (2540476) 17 years ago

I don't think (g/G)od really gives a crap if you capitalize the word.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] k-cochran13 16 years ago

.."the fact that you capitalized the noun "god" renders your opinions void of any relevance to critical thinking about movies and/or anything else."

He didn't say that at all. He said that if you believe in god that you clearly aren't a critical thinker. You can say whatever you want..but it is still going to be void of intelligence.
P.S. GO SEE RELIGULOUS

[–] jolem53 16 years ago

sean-355,

The way the original poster is using the word it should absolutely be capitalized. He is not referring to this god or that god, but God. Not only are you a snob but you're not very bright to boot. Jerk.

[–] kitkatkaity 12 years ago

The fact that you would discredit someone's opinion because their personal beliefs differ from your own, renders you a unreasonable bigot.

[–] JackieBlu 19 years ago

It was heavy handed for her to come down the stairs naked. I think someone really innocent would have started slower.

[–] locust83 19 years ago

I rented this movie. I started falling asleep right at the beginning but forced myself to stay awake and watch the rest of it. I hated the two main characters-Jack and Rose. The movie just kept getting more and more ridiculous. Definitely one of the worst movies I've watched this year.

[–] someday_the_waves 18 years ago

**some spoilers**

i, too, sat through the entire movie and i thought it was (and i mean this in the nicest way) absolute rubbish. i wanted to like this movie so badly, but i feel as if i don't even want to wait until tomorrow to bring it back to blockbuster because if i have to look at the dvd cover any longer, i might want to throw it in the garbage or out a window.

i can appreciate the occasional artsy, indie flick -- in fact, i really dig those kinds of movies. today, i watched the first hour and a half of this movie, turned it off, went to meet a friend, returned to it three hours later, turned it back on and it's STILL ON. to say that i am disinterested would be an understatement.

daniel day louis' fake accent is beginning to grate on my nerves and the character of rose is way too eccentric to believe as real.

i think this movie really tried so hard to be moving and complex and different and beautiful (although some of the cinematography was awesome) but fell short because there was NO STORY.

the only characters who i thought had any dimension were ryan mcdonald's rodney and jena malone's red berry.

and so it's just finally ended, and okay, so she ends up living in vermont potting plants? with gray and his wife and baby? who the hell cares? it would've been cool if she moved to nova scotia and lived on the beach somewhere...and maybe, i dunno, game the viewer some inclination that she was happy with her life and had moved on from two years earlier?

i thought the point of forwarding a few years at the end of a movie was to show some kind of growth in the characters, but i saw nothing spectacularly different about rose. i really saw no point in having rose survive her father, if all the story is going to tell me is that she turns into a traitor -- oh, i'm sorry, that she gives in to societal norms -- and moves to the states. to be honest, it would have been deeply disturbing, but also incredibly touching, if she and jack had burned together in that house that they both loved so much.

i was excited to see that jason lee was starring in this film as well, because i think he's terrific, but he was disappointingly underused and only said about four sentences.

disappointing all around. for a truly moving, complex, different, beautiful, eccentric film with heart, try pieces of april or life as a house (also starring jena malone) instead.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fanaticita 18 years ago

I think it is amazing that people have such different opinions of this film. Just goes to show you how different we all are, and I say viva la difference! However, I LOVE this film and recently bought it and hope to see it dozens of times!!! So there! haha

[–] someday_the_waves 18 years ago

dellaporte--

1) i'm sincerely sorry for misspelling day-lewis' name, but i really don't think i have to agree that DDL is one of the best actors of our time, and i *really* don't think you should be telling me to "educate" myself. i am a highly educated person who just so happens not to go crazy for day-lewis.

2) if you read my post, then you've heard my argument for lack of story.

3) the character of rose made me want to vomit. period.

everyone is entitled to his and her own opinion. this was mine. respect that.

[–] mcristina-ramos 17 years ago

I agree that DDL is always great. He can perform an amazingly different type of roles, always perfectly. Compare, for example, his roles in IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER and A ROOM WITH A VIEW. He is brilliant.

As for this film, I confess I did not like it. I watched it because it had DDL, but I didn't understand the film.

[–] aseidl 17 years ago

Just watched the movie, hoping, like so many here, to be entertained. And, like so many, was not just disappointed but thoroughly horrified that such a good idea (70's environmentalist dad lives in isolation with beautiful, dutiful daughter but things start to crumble when he becomes doomed by illness), PLUS such good shooting (Kuras is tops), PLUS amazing talent (Day-Lewis, Keener, the Rodney charater), PLUS great set design and costuming...all went SO far down the crapper.

To me, the central problem was Rose's character and Miller's direction of her. Miller kept the camera on her almost gushingly. Her dialogue delivery was worse than bad, in fact, Rose had me so annoyed that like another poster, I was wishing harm on the girl by the end.

What I wouldn't give for that 112 minutes back.

However, I just want to add that I really liked Miller's "personal Velocity" and would recommend it.

[–] salingeresque 16 years ago

i'd long intended to watch this film. arthur miller is one of my favorite authors and so i was always interested in seeing what his daughter "had to say" -

apparently not much.

things that annoyed me:

1) rose, in general.
2) the snake. phew, thank goodness my 8th grade teacher taught me about metaphors!
3) the bed of flowers? ophelia, wha? who? dial-a-cliche
4) catherine keener. always annoying. i've never seen an angrier looking woman. i'm convinced her nether regions exhale dragon fire. never mind all that - it made no sense, whatsoever, that jack would date her, want her to live with him throughout his dying days, etc.
5) i like jena malone pretty well - had an affinity toward her since i was a young lass - ah, not even she brightened my disappointment
6) that dude from little miss sunshine just creeps me out, period. i never, ever again want to think about him taking the virginity of a girl with the emotional maturity of a seven year old *ever* again.
7) for all those kids posting who are still patting themselves on the back for "thinking outside the box" and liking this "indie production" despite it's "lack of explosions" - what the hell kind of cheap trash was the father-daughter sexy kiss? woof.

[–] speckster 16 years ago

Excellent summation!

I saw this movie primarily to get a "baseline" for the chemistry between DDL and Dano prior to seeing "There Will Be Blood"... The only reason I sat through the whole movie was because of my fascination with DDL's resemblance to Keith Richards. That was it. Didn't care about the characters; let them eat Prozac... I was simply fascinated that Richards turned in a fine performance despite a long history of drug abuse....

Anyway, DDL is my favorite actor. Admire Dano, Keener as well.... But even Muhammad Ali ate canvas every now and then.... Can't wait to see "There Will Be Blood"... As Bill the Butcher would say, "OOopsy-Daisy!"

A lobotomy means never having to say you're sorry.....

[–] mistyrain 17 years ago

I totally hate both Jack and Rose and wanted her to die in that room with her father. I have hated mant films but this is the first one where literally I felt that I wasted my time.

[–] nerofly 18 years ago

**
I usually NEVER walk out of a movie, but this one was too much.
**

I'm not convinced you can usually never do something . . .

[–] Laygz 18 years ago

You’re right! Technically ‘usually never’ doesn’t make sense. So that makes his/her entire post and opinion invalid. I sure hope there're no spelling mistakes in this, as it will also render my opinion on this film worthless.

[–] fobronik 18 years ago

Since you didn't finish watching the entire film, you didn't get to see Rose's character develop. Her reaction to Jack and Kathleen in the room was JUST ENOUGH to make her wants to approach Rodney. Her thought process and emotions have been ultimately shaped and warped by her life on the commune.

[–] someday_the_waves 18 years ago

WAIT! if rose was raised by her scottish father on the commune, and accents are usually transferred from parents to children...does that mean that daniel day-lewis is not the greatest actor ever?

[–] tfeilding 17 years ago

Accents are usually passed between peerts and not from parent to child. If you have friends whose parents are immigrants, you may notice that your friend's accent is not the same as the parents.

I do think though that in this film her father was who she spent almost all her time with, so her accent would have been based on his.

[–] Karmakaze 17 years ago

Oh, well if the assistant director thought it stunk, he must be right and all different opinions must be void.

People are very touchy. I enjoyed the movie, particularly Daniel Day-Lewis's character.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]