MovieChat Forums > 45 Years (2015) Discussion > The Most Boring Movie I've Seen In Years

The Most Boring Movie I've Seen In Years


Boring doesn't necessarily mean bad. I get why this is a good movie: the acting is superb yet subtle; contains universally relatable themes of regret, self-doubt, decades of partnership; and blah blah blah more.

Doesn't change the fact that this is a boring-ass movie, and as boring as they get. Bring coffee and perhaps some amphetamines before you watch this, because you will have trouble staying engaged (unless you're so used to a life lacking any sort of excitement that you've honed your ability to enjoy watching paint dry).

Why is this movie so well received and showered with so much praise on the web? Because cool, level-headed, sincere and honest folks won't watch this. Only snobs who spend every year chasing banal small independent films, that they pretend are about more than they really are, will watch this. They will then proceed to stroke each others' private parts ever so gently, with increasing satisfaction (and perhaps ecstasy), as they talk about how 'marvellous', 'devastating' and 'haunting' this movie was for them.

reply

I would tend to agree, but I think you could find a less juvenile way of stating that you found the movie boring. I felt for an hour and a half film, it was incredibly slow, the characters are unlikable, particularly Kate.

reply

I couldn't stand her and couldn't come up with any empathy for her character.

reply

It was marvelous and haunting.
Care to share some great movies with us then?
People who appreciate this enjoy subtle and realistic cinema.
But hey you didn't like it. Won't stop me from thinking its a masterpiece.

reply

I think that as far as growing old in the context of middle-class life, "Another Year" was a great movie. An old couple going through some common issues, but the characters are likeable, the dialogue is interesting, and some scenes really make you fell uncomfortable but in a rewarding way. This flick was just so empty! A hokey old man who is never present, a wife who carries the marriage pretty much by herself, and in the end absolutely nothing changes.

reply

Huh? Nothing changes? You missed the damn ending then!!

reply

Yeah yeah the king is not naked at all and his robes are the finest you've ever seen... They dance at their lame 40th anniversary party and all ends well. Did I watch a different cut or something?

reply

all ends well


All ends with Kate's confirmation that the past 45 years have been a lie, and if not a lie, dictated at every step by Geoff's memory of his deceased lover - even down to their wedding song.

I didn't find the film to be all that engaging, in fact, I expected a lot more... but to say nothing changes and it all ends well is completely off.

2015 Winners: http://i.imgur.com/w3cDbZ0.png

reply

But that comes across to me as a major hyperbole. The guy lost the love of his life for chrissake, as well as his unborn child. He moved on, but never entirely got over it. Can you blame him for being distraught when body is discovered? It's not as if he hid that from Kate, she knew his former girlfriend died up on that mountain. There may not have been entirely full disclosure about his past, but let a man keep a skeleton or two in his closet (it's not as if he was a former child molester or Hitler's clone). Kate was fairly understanding for the most part, if it wasn't for the old coot acting super shady about the whole thing, this would've been a 15-minute movie. Eventually they both move on and seem pretty happy when they dance into the credits. Like I said, it's artificially drawn out with no real substance to fill an hour-and-a-half.

reply

"Seem" is the key word. If they seemed pretty happy, it was for the sake of keeping up appearances at the party. The only thing worse to Kate than knowing she had a hollow marriage was if all of her friends knew it too. I thought Kate's final action and expression at the end of the dance made it extremely clear that she is anything but happy, that her faith in the foundation of her marriage had completely eroded away over the week, and that it was going to be an uphill climb to "start again" every morning for the rest of the marriage.

As for Kate being understanding, I thought that any pretense of understanding ended as soon as she realized Katja was more than just a hiking friend--that they had pretended to be married. That's her first shock, and she's obviously not sure they were just pretending. After that point, every single thing that he revealed was one more new surprise to Kate. She obviously began to add up the similarities. The names--Kate v. Katja. The hair color. The age. Pregnant v. childless. Every new fact reinforced the idea that she was a second-string substitute for Katja. Even all those years later, when they were having sex, his equipment didn't stop working until Kate told him to open his eyes, which presumably prevented him from fantasizing that he was having sex with the 27-year-old Katja.

Knowing her husband loved someone before her and kept it a relative secret is not the issue. Gradually coming to believe that she was and still is little more than a substitute for the dead girl undermines the entire 45-year marriage. That was not a happy ending.

reply

Geoff clearly stated that Katja was 2 years older than him in their relationship...

reply

Geoff clearly stated that Katja was 2 years older than him in their relationship... Kate is a few or several years younger than Geoff.

reply

You're missing the point that he was merely hiding in their marriage, comforted by Kate, but not truly in love with her. "The choices we make in our youth are most important," he says at their 45th anniversary party. And she realises the choices she made were foolish and the man she made them for, submitted to, was not worthy of her love.

reply

I didn't even realize she was pregnant until I read this post and then I had to go back and watch that scene again. I thought Kate was looking at a wedding ring. I didn't evenn notice her stomach.

Poorly Lived and Poorly Died, Poorly Buried and No One Cried

reply

Even down to their wedding song? More importantly, down to deciding not to have children and a family of their own.

reply

I am no film snob but I did stay engaged with this one to the end. Yes, it was slow and I can see why some would perhaps find it boring but Charlotte Rampling's performance in this was excellent. Sometime's it's nice to take a break from the blockbusters and watch something a bit different. I would say, perhaps, the big action movies are there to distract someone from their less than exciting life! It's a bit immature to think that anyone who enjoys a film in this genre is all the things you have described just because you didn't particularly like it.

reply

Man, why does everyone have nothing but praise for this flick? Guess it really warrants a second viewing.

reply

No, it really doesn't. She was an insecure, passively dominating c u n t who at 60-something years of age, was still about as emotionally mature as an American 18 year old chick. I wouldn't say that it was "boring" though. I was SICKENED by her selfishness, foolishness, and passive masculine characteristics. I kept waiting for him to put her in her place and tell her that his memories of a woman he loved BEFORE he met her were personal and didn't need to be shared with an insecure bitch who couldn't possibly understand what he was going through due to her selfishness. I mean really, what pathetic 60-something year old woman goes rummaging through her husband's personal effects?!!

reply

^5

reply

The like it because they think it's haute cine. Like all those awful "today, tomorrow, yesterday, etc" boring French flicks. Oh, you must see 45 years for its emotional esthetically constructed ambient variable synergy and other crap. Ugh.

reply

Was her performance that good? She probably did this performance in her sleep. It wasn't exactly the toughest role or most interesting character to play. I think her "excellent performance" may be in your head a bit.

DK
Thanks for Playing
http://www.twitter.com/DaveKast

reply

"In your head" would normally indicate someone is imagining things. I didn't imagine her performance, I merely had an opinion on it. Obviously, some will disagree but hopefully in a slightly less patronising manner. For me, it was the understated way she handled the role that made it an excellent performance.

reply

Her performance, like you say, emoting as a moping, miserable, morose woman, could have been phone in. Love Charlotte but this was a yawn inducing waste of time

reply

I agree. I'm not snob either, but I stayed engaged till the end too. I actually liked Courtenay's performance more than Rampling's though both were very good.

Poorly Lived and Poorly Died, Poorly Buried and No One Cried

reply

The screenplay was like by some film school student who idolizes Bergman but has zero life experience himself. I guess people are just starving for good dramas and give a free pass to stuff like this. It's not necessarily a bad film, but I agree that it was boring as hell. The dialogue was mundane. Look at a Bergman film. He really knows how to write great dialogue where just two people in a room for two hours feels thrilling. Andrew Haigh is no Bergman.

reply

So very true about Haigh. He's a young and inexperienced, not to mention that his entire repertoire relates to young gay couples. Also, apparently the short story this movie is based on is only 8 pages long! No wonder this film is such a snore-fest- they spread that *beep* so thin you could hardly taste the essence of the story.

reply

Now that you mention it, it really does feel like a short story that is stretched out too thin. Could've been a good short film, but as a feature there's just not enough to carry the whole lenght.

reply

I disagree with you! 2015 is one of the best years for drama films with an impressive number of great films: Carol, Spotlight, The Duke of Burgundy, Anomalisa,..; I don't think that people are starving for good dramas this year like what you said because there are so much good films for them to enjoy!
I love Bergman and admire every single of his films but I have to admit that sometimes, I find the dialogues of his films quiet melodramatic. I know that Andrew Haigh loves Bergman too (his two favorite films are "Fanny and Alexander" and "Cries and Whispers"- both of them are masterpieces) but his films (45 years and Weekend) are not influenced by Bergman much. The dialogues in Andrew Haigh's films are subtle and very realistic that I could relate to his films more than Bergman's films.
So I have to say: Of course Andrew Haigh's films are never as good as Bergman's films but "45 years" is still the masterpiece of this year and this film is far from boring!

reply

I agree. Calling anyone who likes a film that you don't "get" a snob is so tired (previous posters). This film is a work of art. Perhaps you need to have lived a little bit longer and have loved someone deeply and for a long time to have it really resonate -- probably the critics and fans who love it are over 40. But the tragedy of the film is universal and so painful. This is realism, and some people just don't want that in their films. Go watch something else. There's a reason this movie is so acclaimed -- it's brilliant.

reply

[deleted]

delete this post right away. it is disgusting, very prejudiced and is clearly written by someone who'd much rather watch a terrible hollywood popcorn film with things flying at the screen every two seconds.
just appreciate that this movie is loved by many people, not to mention intelligent critics, and i personally didn't find one second of it boring. it's a masterpiece in minimalist drama, and yet still manages to knock your socks off.

reply

"Delete this post right away." Lol

reply

I don't agree with OP at all but really, delete the post??? The OP just had an opinion about this film and you may agree or disagree with him but no need to ask him to "delete the post right away"! And in fact, based on his rating list, I don't think he likes "terrible hollywood popcorn film" (it is quiet stereotype when somebody doesn't like a film which is considered critical acclaimed, they suddenly love watching hollywood popcorn, don't you think???). It is just a matter of taste!

reply

There is no doubt that the movie was slow. But slow does not have to be boring.
I think that as we see faster and faster paced films, our patience for films that are delivered to us at life's true pace may tend to bore us. That is a pity. For some reason, I think of the analogy of someone who constantly puts too much salt or sugar in their food and drink, and then finds foods without excessive salt/sugar to be bland. The pity is that all that action (all that salt and sugar) can blind us to the subtle and sublime flavors in food, film, and life.
I too would have liked this film to deliver more, but I quite enjoyed it.
I will add that much of the husband's reflection and sadness might stem not just from losing an old love, but having to reflect on the loss of his youth and vitality. That reflection, which I feel could be viewed as a fair part of his melancholy, would not have to be a threat to the wife, but something that they might have had an opportunity to share, thereby enriching their life.

reply

Most boring movie I've seen in years might be a bit hyperbolic, but I mostly agree with you about questioning the universal praise. I actually came to this message board after watching, to try and figure out why I didn't like it more.

First of all, I think you're mistaken about Geoff's disclosure about Katya in any capacity beyond mentioning having dated a girl who died. Kate stated that neither of them had ever spoken about her mother or Katya's deaths in their 45 years. The fact that she was pregnant at the time of the incident, or it's role in his choosing not to have kids with Kate were definitely off the table.

The acting and dialogue were superb and natural. The cinematography was well crafted, with some very interesting scenes (like Kate watching the slides in the attic against the sheet, with nothing but the sounds of the projector cycling through slides punctuating her getting deeper into reality.) The editing and pacing were slow at times, but I found it purposeful rather than daunting. The story itself (in reflection, as a whole) is devastating.

As a whole, however, I just didn't find it affecting for some reason. The only scenes where I really felt myself connecting to these characters were the sex scene (which was such an overwhelmingly human moment that it was painful to watch,) and Geoff's speech. My lack of attachment or empathy to/with the characters left the ending feeling like a cheap plot twist, rather than a revelation. I just didn't really care.

I think this movie must have fallen victim to the fact that it didn't have that much to say, but tactfully addressing each of it's plot points and creating the overarching sense of monotony in their lives would have been difficult to achieve at a lesser run-time.

If you sat down to watch this movie critically, there are a lot of components to rave about, but on an emotional level I was left wanting. I think we'll begin to see more mixed reviews, or people scratching their heads with the same question, as more of the general audience get to see it.

reply

I appreciate slow, interesting films. The key, being interesting, and this film was boring to the point of torture.

I LOVE MIke Leigh films. I like slow character development if there's some point to it. And theres the rub on this movie.

It WAS like dropping in on two boring people for a week, and who wants to do that? In this film, the supposed trigger for their behaviour was something that happened 55 years ago, and they receive a reminder.

He may have been slightly emotional, to the point he might start smoking, and would want to dig up old pictures, but that's hardly unusual or would be cause for any wedge to drive through what looks to be a pretty decent, long-term relationship.

The scenes dragged and everything felt forced by bad writing, rather than natural behaviour. Real people simply don't let these things impact them that much unless they're mentally disturbed and show signs somewhere in the 45 years they've been together.

It might have made some sense if Kate had known Katya, or if she had shown some signs of obssessive behaviour, but she didn't.

He told her he wasn't even going to Switzerland, so that should have put an end to her concerns. She's hardly living in the shadow of Katya.

Combine all that with long, pointless scnes that go nowhere, and I really don't understand the praise this has received.

reply