I found the film very fast paced and compelling. It wasn't boring at all. The characters were horrible and disgusting, but I still cared about them and felt sympathy for them. In my opinion, this is a masterpiece.

I dont need to project anything. just look at the most popular movies of any time period. they will almost universally be escapism movies that portray things different than reality.
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

"he tries to portray reality but fails to realize that its not why people watch movies. "
you should not project your taste upon others.

It was directed by Michael Haneke. A trademark trait of Haneke is that his movies is slow paced and his scenes drag on. he tries to portray reality but fails to realize that its not why people watch movies. He has said in an interview before that he tried to make The Seventh Continent (1989) - another of his films as boring as he could.
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

Well, if you find sex and music boring, I can see why you feel this way.

Are you a sith? you seem to talk in aboslutes.
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

Only dumb people and little kids get bored.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

The movie is about complexity of human nature. Yes it is "slow" because it takes time to reveal it. I would call it realistic - not in the sense that these events occur every day in every little town and suburb - but in the sense that there are many people who are confused about themselves, their desires, and their relationships. Watch 'Oscar and Lucinda' - the message is essentially the same although the characters are much more likable, especially Lucinda.

This message has been deleted.

I agree completely. To each their own..

I do believe that this film is not meant for everyone and while watching, you do tend to feel dragged due to the slow pace of the film. But once the plot sets in, I was intrigued by Erika's complex nature and the way it was brilliantly portrayed by Ms. Huppert on screen. However, I was a bit let-down by the abrupt climax.
If I criticize, I criticize the idea and not the person.

I believe this film is only boring to someone who decides to watch it without making an effort to understand its characters. It is not meant to be an easy and entertaining watch. Haneke expects us to read between the lines, to form our own opinions on what we think is happening in the characters' minds. He wants us to look beneath the surface. I personally love this film. It is visually amazing, and it is worth watching simply for the fantastic acting, especially on Huppert's part. She creates an Erika that is real, that is complexe. Of course I can understand why ''The Piano Teacher'' isn't for everyone. It's a heavy subject, and it takes a lot of concentration and thought. But like I said, I don't see why you would watch this film without wanting to make this effort, without looking at its artistic/psychological value rather than its entertainement value.
Folie n'est pas draison, mais foudroyante lucidit.

I do agree with you that this film was a little slow and it did drag in some parts but nonetheless i think it was a powerful film. Perhaps it helps to maybe watch the movie more than once to appreciate the film. Otherwise, it probably one of those things where you either see the importance of it or you don't.

It is easier to relate with characters that are likable, thus engaging the audience. While it certainly is possible to make a good movie without likable characters, it is a much harder effort to do so and many people that attempt it - fail to do so.
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

The Op doesn't seem to post here anymore
However, regarding this:
She had ZERO dimension and neither did her fellow characters.
There are lots of layers to the characters that can be traced through their facial and body expressions, how they relate to one another and around the theme of music (Erika's talk about Schubert being ugly is one example that comes to mind). These layers create fleshed out, 3-D characters but the film's script, acting and direction leave the viewer with lots to imagine, as befits an intelligent film. Expositions on the characters are not required.
Her mommy was mean and nosey
She was a bit more than that
so she tries to make out with her?
I don't understand how this was deduced from the mother being mean and nosy.
To say a little often is to tell more than to say a great deal.

Erika was an incredibly layered and complex character, she wasn't just a "pervert", she was lonely to an insane degree, severely clinically depressed and acted out fantasies of degradation and sex to numb her pain, she thought she wanted to be abused by others, but in the end we find out that she really wanted to be loved and just never expected anyone could possibly love her.

This message has been deleted.

Please enlighten me lovewhat "point" did I miss? And please stop trying to make yourself seem like a cultured movie goer for liking crap like this by telling me to watch something "blow up." For the record, foreign films with beep plots and tiring characters do not make a film intelligent.

Luckycharm you totally missed the point. Why even view a film like this if you lack patience for a payoff? Go watch something blow up if you don't want a 'snoozefest.'

In a way I suppose I am. It is not as though only "good and righteous" characters make a movie interesting because they give you someone to "root for" as you put it. Rather, this movie was a snoozefest because I didn't care about the welfare about what happened to any of them. The piano teacher was a pervert.cool. She had ZERO dimension and neither did her fellow characters. I don't know, maybe the director was attempting to be vague and mysterious but honesty I don't need a movie to drag on and on with zilch knowledge as to why the characters behave the way they do. Her mommy was mean and noseyso she tries to make out with her? I wanted just a tad more background and maybe this movie wouldn't have felt like it went on for 6 hours.

A seeming sidestep on your part to avoid a reasonable observation. Are you saying that unless you can 'root' for a character, a film is unaffecting or unenjoyable?

"The idea at least a character have to be likable"
Huh? You wrote a sentence, how on earth did you screw up the grammar?