Am I the only one to find it sooo boring?
-
boatsgilhooley — 16 years ago(February 13, 2010 09:36 PM)
I own the 2-CD set which contains the roadshow version196 minutes. Of all the great McQueen performances, I rate this one tops. As good as Scofield was in "A Man for All Seasons", the award for Best Actor should rightfully have gone to Steve McQueen. Hollywood has always confused an English accent with a great acting performance or a great movie (i.e. Chariots of Fire). Such was the case here.
Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules. -
paul-3266 — 18 years ago(July 03, 2007 12:42 PM)
No. I have though developed a grudging appreciation for the flick. That "Holdman come down" part is way toooooo corny and the wedding was something like the one I attended while in the Marines. The Platoon seargant put on his suit and married my buddy to a goofball who required a wedding.well you get it. The Movie snobs won't just let you plow through a movie without demanding we either love it as an epic (Movie Jargon for over three hours) or be an idiot. You are right. That whole ricebowl thing was goofy too. I crossed the Pacific (heading for Nam) the same year the flick came out and the old salts on the navy ship said that crap never happened. Can't imagine Navy officers allowing for any form of slack duty. Boooooring yes, which does not begin to explain why I watch it every time I get a chance. Just like I watch McQueens greatest movie - The Cincinatti (sp) Kid. Anne Margaret was so lucious. Excuse me while I see if my wife is interested in some.later.
-
haristas — 18 years ago(December 22, 2007 04:46 PM)
For some on first viewing I can understand how you might find it boring, but it's really a very good movie and I find it holds up over repeated viewings, but that's because I saw it when it first came out in theatres with my dad. Now I like it because its an old friend and I like so much that is in it. If you have any interest in trying to come to like this movie, I suggest getting the CD of the Jerry Goldsmith score. If you like film music, it's one of the great scores and you may turn out liking that a lot and then be able to appreciate the movie. (Man, I just wrote "like" a lot!)
-
scruffy58 — 18 years ago(July 06, 2007 05:27 AM)
There was a time when films paid careful attention to character development. I have never found the film boring. It is a carefully structured and exquisitely crafted masterpiece. There is such attention to detail concerning all of the characters and scenes. Consider, for example, one of my favorite scenes: the wedding of Maily and Frenchy. I have rarely seen such a sad and achingly beautiful moment in an epic film like "The Sand Pebbles". The coldness of the sparse room (wonderful use of color and set decoration) and the terrific acting by the four principles, coupled with some fine dialogue and the tragic underscore by the great Jerry Goldsmith all combine to create a scene of devestating power. Watch as Maily and Frenchy, once the ceremony is over, walk away from the camera towards the doors. They become so small and are completely dwarfed by the huge doors. It is a wonderful visual commentary on how all of the characters are overpowered by the events surrounding them. There really is no escaping the fates awaiting each and every one of them. This film could never really be pulled off today. The characters would be one dimensional and the battle scenes bigger and louder. The film took its time to flesh out the characters and made them into people that we care about.
"Thus, we began our longest journey together."
Adult Scout, 'To Kill A Mockingbird' -
rready4198-693-489748 — 11 years ago(June 11, 2014 04:58 PM)
You said that beautifully and I agree with you 100%! Character development does take time and you knew all of them by the time it ended. If it had been shorterit would NOT have been as good as it was. I watched it twice (I had the 2-DVD set) so I watched both versions days apart and enjoyed it both times. That is a lot of time but well worth it because every time you look at something you see something you missed the last time. Robert Wise did an excellent job with this movie and you appreciate Steve more after watching him play Jake Holman!
-
blwilmeth — 11 years ago(January 30, 2015 12:24 AM)
I agree. In the days prior to the "post-modern" ethos becoming supreme (some time around 1970), movies were vehicles by which character development and symbolism could ride "shotgun" with action and romance. "Cool Hand Luke," "The Graduate," "To Kill A Mockingbird," "A Man for All Seasons," and others both haunted and charmed us. They had a message about life, but it was designed to be both ingested and then digested. If you didn't grow up in those days of occasional self reflection or introspection, I suppose those movies do seem a bit tawdry and long. For me (dob 1951) I do not tire of the appreciation that goes with watching (still again) the storyteller work his or her magic through cinema.
-
rj-27 — 11 years ago(January 30, 2015 11:06 AM)
Great comments and well said. Whenever someone starts a thread with "incredibly boring" or whatever, on a film like this, you want to say their opinion just doesn't count. Sort of like saying Bach was a mediocre composer. Dismissed.
I first saw this movie in the early 70's on a black and white Philco. I came into it about 1/3 of the way in, but was immediately captivated. When it ended almost three hours later, commercials included, I could hardly believe I had sat that long to watch a movie.
30+ years later, watching in HD widescreen, I am just as captivated.
Democracy is the pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. H.L. Mencken -
Hancock_the_Superb — 18 years ago(September 13, 2007 09:08 AM)
I disagree, although the slow-pacing does hurt the film. I really like "The Sand Pebbles" overall, but some sections do go on for way too long - not a great deal happens until the Intermission. I also dislike the romance between Frenchy and Maily. . . that didn't do anything but slow the film down. Also, I didn't like Candice Bergen and some of the supporting actors (Larry Gates, Simon Oakland) were WAY too hammy. But overall, I think it's a very good film. McQueen is great, Richard Crenna and Mako too, the action scenes, location shooting and musical score are brilliant.
"The best of them won't come for money - they'll come for
ME!
" - Lawrence of Arabia -
scruffy58 — 18 years ago(September 14, 2007 10:05 AM)
I think that the romance between Frenchy and Maily is a perfect symbol of the overall plot of the film - people who are displaced and searching for a purpose and for the right thing to do. In addition, their tragic fates mirror the hopelessness of the film's setting. I also think Ms. Bergen is terrific in her sweet niavete. She was (by her own admission) an unplolished actress when the film was made but that is one of the reasons I think her performance works. I agree with you completely regarding McQueen, Crenna and Mako; I also agree concerning the technical aspects of the film, notably the cinematography and scoring. I'd much rather watch the entire "The Sand Pebbles" than mindless and annoying garbage like any of the Pirates of the Carribbean" films.
"Thus, we began our longest journey together."
Adult Scout, 'To Kill A Mockingbird' -
zillion29 — 18 years ago(September 15, 2007 08:30 AM)
This film suffers from almost-on-purpose levels of monotonous editing. The brothel boxing match is mind-bendingly drawn out - did we really need 3 rounds to establish that the fat Bluto guy was going to get tired? And the whole crap with Frenchy and Mailing is a stale rehash of what happens to Red Skelton is Sayonara!
-
Hancock_the_Superb — 18 years ago(September 15, 2007 11:11 AM)
Well. . . bring the Pirates films into the conversation is unnecessary, although I think I see your point.
Yeah, maybe there's symbolic purpose to Frenchy's romance with Maily, but it does nothing but drag down the plot. And Frenchy isn't that interesting of a character. As for Bergen, I just don't like her period, at least as an actress. The only film I liked her in was "The Wind and the Lion", and I think that was more the character than Candace herself.
"The best of them won't come for money - they'll come for
ME!
" - Lawrence of Arabia -
rready4198-693-489748 — 11 years ago(June 11, 2014 05:16 PM)
For this movie I think the marriage between Frenchy and Maily was okay and showed that somebody had "real" feelings and respected that woman. I know when I saw "Lawrence of Arabia" I was glad there were no women because it would have messed up the flavor of that particular movie.
Larry Gates was a bit ignorant and naive. Candice Bergen was fresh and that made her play the role just like she was "new." Simon Oakland played the kind of role I had always seen him play previous to The Sand Pebbles. He played that role very well because it really got to me that he almost got his filthy hand on Maily!
You said that the action started after the Intermission that was because all of the groundwork had been laid and they could head for the conclusion full steam ahead. I thought it was fine just the way it way. I would have felt cheated if it had been shorter. -
Evitadp-1 — 18 years ago(September 17, 2007 12:00 AM)
I didn't complain about the money, I never said something like that. I still think that it's better that I own it, because it's a McQueen classic. But the movie, yes, for me it was long and boring and Candice Bergen sucked big time.
I'm smiling. This should scare you. -
Charlie Goose — 18 years ago(October 12, 2007 07:35 AM)
Yes, it is a tad too long, but most of it is totally riveting. I've always thought this to be Steve McQueen's best performance.
And Candice Bergen did give a lousy performance, but then again her career is filled with them.
You smell like beef and cheese, you don't smell like Santa.