An hour of my life i'll never get back - Elephant (2003) Discussion

[–] cnickels 13 years ago

I totally agree with the above post. I ff'd through most of it after I realized it was scene after boring scene of... kids walking down the hall, kids eating lunch, kids being kids.
I came here to see what others thought. I didn't know there was a mass murder at the end (I stay spoiler-free). Guess I'll go back and ff to that part, but I still think this movie was boring and was ultimately a waste of time.

reply

[–] Whatsifsowhatsit 13 years ago

Actually I thought the beginning of the movie was cool, the end wasn't so much.

---
My vote history: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=13037287

reply

[–] joethulhu 11 years ago

Obviously you didn't watch much more than nineteen minutes, at which point the shooters enter the school. That's pretty low tolerance.

reply

[–] corsi71inc 13 years ago

Wow. What a prettily composed yet utterly meaningless exercise. I am referring, naturally, to your rant.

It would be too easy and a bit of a cop-out to suggest that you are too stupid to 'get' this movie. It would also be too easy for me to ask you if you expected Bruce Willis to come crashing through a window of the cafeteria and exchange gunfire and witticisms with the teenage shooters.

What I will have to say is that you obviously went in to watching this movie with an agenda. Spare me the smart aleck remark of "Yeah, my agenda is to be entertained!"
You sat down to watch a Gus Van Sant movie which describes itself as "An ordinary day in high school" and you are surprised that it is a quiet contemplative movie about an ordinary day in high school? Did it occur to you that a mass murder in the midst of the most ordinary and pedestrian of days is exactly the incongruence the movie was trying to depict?

Look, err... Cemented, there is nothing wrong with preferring a plot-driven action packed movie. Really, there isn't. But you are bitching about a movie not being that when there was never any intention for it to be! In other words, use your brain before subjecting yourself to that which you either do not understand or have no interest in. If you have no desire to read subtitles, get a movie in a language you speak. If you want sex scenes, don't watch the History Channel. Don't assume that Star Wars and 2001:A Space Odyssey are going to be similar just because they're both in the SciFi section at Blockbuster.

I suppose I could go on, but I hope you get the drift. No, this movie is not for all tastes. No, it is not superior to enjoy this type of movie, nor is it inferior to not be interested in it. This isn't a judgement on your taste but your intuition. This movie was very distinctly what it wanted to be. Don't whine because it wasn't what YOU wanted it to be.

1. Being moody.
2. Being bad at maths.
3. Being sad.

reply

[–] ssssh-915-947755 13 years ago

I'm one of the more patient filmgoers out there. Really, I can sit through anything and appreciate films that most people can't. But when I see a film as pointless as this one it really pisses me off. It's devoid of any form of social commentary. It wasn't really representative of an ordinary day in High School, and the characters weren't believable at all. It also didn't really explain the killers' motives (maybe that was the point, showing how random violence can be.)

Elephant underwhelmed my expectations and the emptiness of the film made me actually look forward to the massacre. And a film based on Columbine should not do that. I'm not complaining about this film not being what I wanted it to be, I'm complaining that it's praised for being something it isn't. If it had forgone it's throwaway hallway scenes and instead devoted that time to developing the personalities of at least one of it's protagonists/antagonists then it might have had some sort of message or impact on me.

reply

[–] corsi71inc 13 years ago

I understand what you're saying, and again it comes down to personal preferences. I have to disagree with you on one important note.

You said "If it had forgone it's throwaway hallway scenes and instead devoted that time to developing the personalities of at least one of it's protagonists/antagonists then it might have had some sort of message or impact on me."

I think it would have been a god awful boring exercise to look into why the 2 shooters were like they were. Scenes of drunk mommy and mean daddy, lectures in school by the dean, sessions with the school shrink... Respectfully, that is the stuff of teen angst movie of the week fluff. It would have been even more boring to see how Timmy wants to go to UCLA and how Suzie got into a fight with her mom and how Bob just got kicked off the soccer team for missing practice. The whole point was to observe the day-to-day monotony of a kid's school life. There does not need to be 'special circumstances' for things like this to happen.

There needn't be time devoted to why; I believe that WAS the message of the film. Kids get picked on and bullied and marginalized every day. Some kids deal with their drunk parents every day. Teen girls obsess about their image every day. That sooner or later someone will bust and go psychotic on the school is not a surprise, not aberrational. There is no 'why', or if there is, it is in our every day lives.

Face it, if you watch a whole movie devoted to the life stories of the kids killed at Columbine, would you say you knew them? Would their deaths be any more tragic for hearing their stories? I respectfully say no. They were living beings. They would be just as unknown (and known, if you get my drift) to you as the fictional kids of Elephant. That is the message, IMHO.

1. Being moody.
2. Being bad at maths.
3. Being sad.

reply

[–] ssssh-915-947755 13 years ago

I'm as sick to death of those cliche "mummy's drunk and daddy's mean" films as the next guy, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's more creative to replace those scenes with tracking shots of heads. I'm currently in high school, and I can't say I weep whenever there's a shooting at a school in the news, but I don't like to see victims represented in a way that is so dull that it makes me forget that they're actual people. And I know that just because I don't like a film that doesn't make it bad, but when I looked at the reviews I found countless people who agree with me. They're not all Bruce Willis fans, either.

That's not my only complaint. The tracking shots get the desired effect but it wears off early on. I'm glad the film wasn't melodramatic, but the actors could have at least been a little less wooden. Wooden characters can be believable (especially when they're as shallow as school students), but when they're being shot at it simply makes no sense. Some of the actors in this film made Keanu Reeves look like Laurence Olivier.

reply

[–] ANDREWEHUNT 13 years ago

Warning... Spoilers follow (you probably knew that)...

I have to agree with ssssh-915-947755. I love anti-Hollywood films that emphasize realism and believable characters. And I thought Elephant did an excellent job in this regard, Still, this is one of the few films I've seen that I thought could have (should have) been longer. And it should have explored the lives of the characters in more depth. Take the character Benny, for example - the African American student who roams the hallway during the massacre. The caption introduces him ("BENNY") and then he wanders the halls and eventually gets gunned down by Eric. Now, I did not want this film to be Die Hard or True Lies or any of that Hollywood crap. But I DID want to know who Benny was. What made him tick? Did he have a little brother or sister who looked up to him? What was his favorite video game? Movie? Type of music? Etc. Did he get along with his parents? Maybe he lived with his grandma? Maybe he wanted to go to Juilliard and study music? Why did he wander the hall so calmly while the shooting was going on? Who missed Benny when he was dead?

Had any of these questions been answered, you would have felt the pathos and tragedy of Benny's death on a deeper level. But they weren't. That doesn't make it a bad movie. That makes it a compelling film containing lots of missed opportunities. That makes it a good film, but not a great film, in my opinion.

"You can dish it out, but you got so you can't take it no more." - Caesar Enrico Bandello

reply

[–] welshy023 13 years ago

Take the character Benny, for example - the African American student who roams the hallway during the massacre. The caption introduces him ("BENNY") and then he wanders the halls and eventually gets gunned down by Eric. Now, I did not want this film to be Die Hard or True Lies or any of that Hollywood crap. But I DID want to know who Benny was. What made him tick? Did he have a little brother or sister who looked up to him? What was his favorite video game? Movie? Type of music? Etc. Did he get along with his parents? Maybe he lived with his grandma? Maybe he wanted to go to Juilliard and study music? Why did he wander the hall so calmly while the shooting was going on? Who missed Benny when he was dead?

I believe it was the filmmakers intention to make you ask those questions, to see these kids getting killed as people that could have, would have if they'd been given a chance to live out their lives. If you were to observe a normal day of school life, you would never figure out someone within those six hours, ie their motivations, their life ambitions, their quirks. Hollywood teen movies have their characters personality on full display, through carefully tweaked dialogue and scenarios. It's a refreshing change to want to crave more, to wish that the killers didn't do what they did so we could spend another day seeing what makes these kids tick. Brilliant movie.

My Movie Ratings:
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=32978565

reply

[–] Eassa 12 years ago

I completely agree with this. Being a student myself I know the pressures of teenage drama and all of those little unimportant details in your life that somehow manage to bring you to even this high of a tipping point. I wouldn't expect something labeled as an "average day" to tell me a lifetime's worth of information to build character, so why would you? The point of this film (at least I believe) was to give you the insight of a basic, emotionally unattached teenager living out their high school years. This movie was shot from an observer's POV, or, in fact, many observers', and it definitely wasn't supposed to attach you to the characters in the time of the massacre, because, what good would that do? Oh yes, you're sad because someone fictional you'd known for an hour died in a tragic accident, am I right? No. I think that would ruin the film, actually. I know that I don't know the back story to every student at my school's lives, in fact, I only know the simplest details, which made it so much easier to put myself into the position of this film. Teenagers don't take the time to learn about their peers, they just automatically group themselves into cliques and go their own ways, so I don't think it would be appropriate to the learning process of this movie if there was any much more character development.

My point is, if you came to watch an emotionally straining movie, you might be in the right place but maybe for the wrong reasons.

"When we don't know who to hate we hate ourselves." -Invisible Monsters

reply

[–] abezerrav 13 years ago

"Face it, if you watch a whole movie devoted to the life stories of the kids killed at Columbine, would you say you knew them? Would their deaths be any more tragic for hearing their stories? I respectfully say no. They were living beings. They would be just as unknown (and known, if you get my drift) to you as the fictional kids of Elephant. That is the message, IMHO. "

______________________________________

I completely agree with this statement. I admire this film precisely because of this. News reports and media always give us back stories on the victims and attempts to explain the motives of the killers, but that is not what will make me care more or less. The truth is they are all human beings, and that is the only thing that matters, and the only thing that makes it tragic. The only people that should know about these kids' background is the people who know them, their families, friends, etc. NOT the entire population that watches these news reports and weeps every time they see one. Movies don't glorify violence half as much as news channels do. And by glorify I mean make a whole story out of it, when the only thing that matters is the violence itself, and the tragedy of lost lives, whether they were young kids who had dreams of becoming singers, artisits, doctors, or middle aged men and women frustrated with working in the cafeteria of a high school.

reply

[–] Badlands1 9 years ago

I also really wanted to love this film, I was excited to see the "roaming hallway" scenes at first, and love that whole highschool backdrop, which is all so familiar and significant in our upbringings, but unlike realistic dramatic highschool movies like River's Edge, Kids, Fresh, Suburbia 83', Bad Boys 83' Over the Edge etc.. I found that after viewing this once, I could appreciate the art value, but feel absolutely no need to view it a second time, where normally great films can be re-watched numerous times for enjoyment. I felt like they could have put some more bullying, drug use, sexually suggestive, or overall dramatic scenes in to keep interest.
Some art belongs stagnant on walls, some in visual motion, this one is trapped, and unfortunately lost between those two worlds.

reply

[–] LEMONPIE_30 12 years ago

@ ssssh-915-947755
I agree with every single word.

reply

[–] BulmaPunkRocker 9 years ago

I agree so much!!

I felt the same way.

Please excuse my terrible redaction, english is not my native language.

reply

[–] asandaaron 9 years ago

Bro you got straight REKT by the guy who responded to you

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Muinaiset 13 years ago

OMG This movie would have been so much better if Bruce Willis actually DID come crashing through the window in the cafeteria!

http://www.last.fm/user/OBLIVIONxSPAWN

reply

[–] Tracey73 13 years ago

OMG This movie would have been so much better if Bruce Willis actually DID come crashing through the window in the cafeteria!

lmao ... I loved this movie, but your post just made me bust out laughing

I'm an automatic steeple for depressed and lonely people ~ Blue October

reply

[–] WiiD_nugz420 13 years ago

Wow. What a prettily composed yet utterly meaningless exercise. I am referring, naturally, to your rant(s).

"yeah...they said that would happen in health class"

reply

[–] prsguitar123 12 years ago

@corsi71inc

Wow what a stupid POST!

Maybe you should use YOUR BRAIN to see this movie for what it actually was....Elephant crap!

If you think a movie showing meaningless lives of teenagers suddenly getting shot with no explanation at all of how it led up to it, is a great plot, you need you head examined! 'nuff said!

reply

[–] nightswatch 12 years ago

stop. this film IS terrible. but you at least seem to like In Bruges so you can't be all bad

on my way to ignoring the entire population of imdb

reply

[–] Definition00 11 years ago

This film is ATROCIOUS and it baffles me how people can like it. Pretension? Perhaps. I'm very interested in the Columbine shootings and have researched them a lot. But before my interest in that I am a film lover and this was a pathetic film. No substance at all. Boring, pretentious and full of it's own deluded self importance.

reply

[–] theunopeneddoor-697-442391 9 years ago

I feel the other way around. In Bruges was boring as Hell while Elephant was a great film.

The thing was Elephant was a film where the SCHOOL was the main character. IT was the protagonist. I know you're not likely to respond as your post was three years ago, but that's my $0.02.

Joseph Chastainme
www.twitter.com/sinnersbible

reply

[–] Neptuny 13 years ago

I kind of doubt you have more interesting things to do.

Great Godzilla's gonads!

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] modica (4169) 3 years ago

I am sure the OP wastes hours online, so him complaining about losing an hour of his or her life is hilarious.

reply

[–] dkenney39 13 years ago

second half movie was better than the first. i liked the idea of the movie, but youre right there's just too much walking and silence.

reply

[–] flanagan-com 13 years ago

idiot

reply

[–] progenmarrs 13 years ago

Newsflash: You're not going to get any of the hours of your life back.

Funny how you felt the film was a waste of time because you have more interesting things to do but you still found time to go on imdb and post about it :)

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] edward2-2 13 years ago

*spoiler*

I have to agree on this. This movie was a huge huge waste.

I mean first of all we see a bunch of boring teens walking up and down on the corridors and having meaningless conversations. You cant really connect to these kids unless you are a same useless teen in a high school right now.

After this first part I was really waiting for the big turning point what will connect all these kids or what interesting stuff will happen with them...

And then comes the shock. Two other idiotic useless kid just start shooting people in the school.

To be honest this kind of drama is just extremely cheap. You can read this kind of stuff in the trashiest newspapers and then all people can go wondering what made these guys shooting other poor people and then comes the PR about violent games must be banned etc. and all parents are moving their heads like sheeps. This two were just mentally ill and stuff like this just happens.

I think this movie can not be rated properly on this site due to lowest score is 1 and this deserve something lower.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] grindcoredrums 13 years ago

I would say it failed at being art too.

reply

[–] dbrockskk1 10 years ago

oh I get it! "fags" is supposed to be an insult!

suzycreamcheese RIP Heath Ledger 1979-2008

reply