Classic Movies I’ve Never Seen and Will Not See (1 Viewer)

[JohnRice]

I'd add The Ten Commandments, Spartacus, Lawrence of Arabia, and Once Upon a Time in the West to that list. There are more...

Well Once Upon a Time in the West is under 3 hours and Spartacus is just a little over 3 hours, so I can't exactly include them in four hour movies.

I even cheated it on Ben-Hur, which I could have sworn was four hours.

 

[Angelo Colombus]

There are some foreign films that have long running times that are my favorites like War & Peace, Napoleon, La Dolce Vita, Ludwig, Fanny and Alexander, Seven Samurai and The Leopard.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Eek!

Maybe if I watch it in two parts...

I do that quite often for many movies that don't come close to 4 hours long. Particularly, movies I have seen beforehand, but some I have never watched.

 

[BobO'Link]

Just to clarify, it’s not three hours plus running times that puts me off films. It’s three hours plus of period romance that has so far put me off GGTW in particular.

But I’ll watch it one day soon. I might even like it.

There's far more than "period romance" in Gone with the Wind. It deserves its place in classic movie history.

 

[JohnRice]

The problem is, no matter what a movie actually is, there's a tendency to see what was expected.

 

[AshJW]

I don’t think I’ve ever refused to see a classic film starring an actor I didn’t like.

I did, once. That had the effect that I missed War Of The World theatrical ...

A friend of mine can’t stand several actors and actresses for no particular reason. I never understood why.



RE: BW films or 4:3 films:
That is strange. I’ll watch every movie in every format with or without color. It just has to be good.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I did, once. That had the effect that I missed War Of The World theatrical ...

A friend of mine can’t stand several actors and actresses for no particular reason. I never understood why.



RE: BW films or 4:3 films:
That is strange. I’ll watch every movie in every format with or without color. It just has to be good.

Is that movie a classic though which is what Tino said, he has refuse to watch any classic film starring an actor he didn't like?

 

[AshJW]

Well no, it’s not a classic. But that’s not the main point IMO.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Well no, it’s not a classic. But that’s not the main point IMO.

It was with Tino as he specifically stated it as so. Anyhow, the reason why I don't want such a thread is because we potentially get to subject matters that are forbidden to discuss here as to why people don't like a particular actor.

 

[BobO'Link]

Well Once Upon a Time in the West is under 3 hours and Spartacus is just a little over 3 hours, so I can't exactly include them in four hour movies.

I even cheated it on Ben-Hur, which I could have sworn was four hours.

Well... seems I totally missed this:

...Not so many four hour ones...

So... with that in mind:

Just about everything else I can think of with such a running length is either not a "classic" or is a serial.

 

[Tino]

Well no, it’s not a classic. But that’s not the main point IMO.

My point was indeed in reference to “classics”.

 

[AshJW]

Point taken.

 

[Tino]

Point taken.

Now if you had said you didn’t want to see the original War Of The Worlds because you hated Gene Barry, well then that’s different.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Just to clarify, it’s not three hours plus running times that puts me off films. It’s three hours plus of period romance that has so far put me off GGTW in particular.

But I’ll watch it one day soon. I might even like it.

"GGTW"? "Go Get That Wind"?

I felt the same as you about "GWTW" until I saw it in 1988. It played at my college's student union, and a friend dragged me to it.

I kinda liked it! Didn't love it but it kept me interested across its long running time, and that was more than expected!

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I suspect she was more likely a fictitious creation.

Thanks for calling me a liar!

 

[Tino]

I suspect she was more likely a fictitious creation.

Huh?

 

[Cineman]

Just to clarify, it’s not three hours plus running times that puts me off films. It’s three hours plus of period romance that has so far put me off GGTW in particular.

But I’ll watch it one day soon. I might even like it.

One of the things that makes GWTW fun to watch is the two lead characters are not the kind of period romantic characters that often come to mind in these genres. They are both rascals! lol. Watching them meet, part, meet, come crashing together and so on throughout the movie makes it immensely entertaining. Now, if it had been three plus hours of the Melanie-Ashley romance, that would be a heavy lift. But even those "goodie-goodies" are made interesting in the way they contrast the Scarlett-Rhet characters, help to define them and make them even more fun to watch.

I think most of the great movies, the classics, transcend the parameters of their genre. If THE GODFATHER's primary accomplishment was to merely look and sound like a gangster movie, then I could understand avoiding it if you're not a fan of gangster movies. But if someone is a fan of marvelous acting, a fine, surprising, compelling, involving screenplay, solidly effective direction in virtually every detail of every scene and overall exemplary production values, then I would have no problem strongly recommending THE GODFATHER and GWTW to anyone who ordinarily does not like gangster movies or period romances but for sure likes well made, entertaining movies.

 

[cinemiracle]

I can understand people refusing to see certain films, even classics. The Vietnam example earlier in the thread was a good one. If people have experienced PTSD-inducing tragedies, then it's understandable that they might not want to see fictionalised versions of similar things, be it the loss of a child, 9/11 etc.

Not as serious as that, but I doubt I'll ever see Michael Haneke's Amour as it'd be a bit much for me due to the subject matter.

As for classics I've not seen, the following spring to mind.

Gone with the Wind
Vertigo
Psycho
Citizen Kane
High Noon

I intend to rectify the last four this year via iTunes and I suspect I'll enjoy them. But for three hours of GWTW I might need longer to steel myself.

On another forum, a member said that someone where he works refuses to see any film made before 1980. Now that's just plain weird as far as I'm concerned.

I have seen AMOUR many times. It is a masterpiece in my opinion.

 

[Ross Gowland]

Oh, I'm sure it is, but I think I'd find the subject difficult.

I watched La Guele Ouverte (also very well crafted) which had a similar theme and that was enough.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

"GGTW"? "Go Get That Wind"?

I felt the same as you about "GWTW" until I saw it in 1988. It played at my college's student union, and a friend dragged me to it.

I kinda liked it! Didn't love it but it kept me interested across its long running time, and that was more than expected!

If this thread was called "Classic films I'll never watch again!" then I could list Gone with the Wind as I have no use for that picture and won't be sitting through it again.

There's nothing I won't watch and give at least a chance to but there are films once visited, I won't be going back to.

Another I was excited to watch was Gentleman's Agreement. I mean directed by Elia Kazan, Gregory Peck, John Garfield...I'm thinking going in this movie will kick ass! Nope, utter garbage...in my opinion. Hey, it happens sometimes good people do lousy work. I think they meant well but this film was a stinker.

There are films I have not made it all the way through like Cameron's Titanic and Spielberg's E.T. but are those considered classics?