MovieChat Forums > The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) Discussion > Can Someone Explain This Movie's Appeal ...

Can Someone Explain This Movie's Appeal to Me?

posted 9 years ago by TheHestinator
30 replies | jump to latest

I just got done watching The Bridge on the River Kwai for the second time and I'm baffled as to why it's held in such high regard. Often, I can watch a critically-acclaimed film, not enjoy it, yet understand why someone would praise it. With TBOTRK, I have a hard time finding much redeeming value.

First, I'll start with what I liked. I appreciated the sweaty, dirty, sweltering atmosphere for many of the jungle scenes. They really went out on location and filmed this stuff in the wilderness. The performances and cinematography are good and the finale elicits some suspense.

However, I just couldn't enjoy the flick. No, this is not because it's old. Two of my all-time favorite movies are silent (Metropolis and Un Chien Andalou). I've seen a lot of war films from all time periods and TBOTRK, for me, ranks among the least entertaining. I have nothing wrong with a motion picture being long, but this movie's length seemed unnecessary, like David Lean is trying to draw out a normal-length story to over two-and-a-half hours to make it more "epic." The movie seems to move in slow-motion at times. The pacing is truly glacial. For a war epic, there's almost no action (and the combat that does take place is rather unexciting) and the main character, played by Alec Guinness, is wholly unlikable. He's completely dedicated to doing the "honorable" (i.e. stupid) or egotistical thing. I understand that not every protagonist is meant to be likable, but c'mon. Few supporting characters make an impression. James Donald's final words are sledgehammer-subtle and made me grin with how unintentionally comedic they are.

While historical accuracy/realism and political mumbo-jumbo generally do not affect how much I enjoy a film, the depiction of P.O.W. life at the hands of the Japanese is troubling here. Plenty of people have pointed this out already, so I won't go into detail. A bunch of Allied prisoners jovially constructing a bridge for fascist Japan strikes me as just wrong. Only in the very beginning of the movie are the horrors of life in a Japanese prison camp shown (and even then it only seems like lip-service). For a film that deals with collaboration with fascism, it doesn't have much to say, other than the usual "War is madness" shtick.

If I'm going to watch a World War II commando picture, I'll choose The Guns of Navarone, and if I'm going to choose a P.O.W. movie from the same war, I'll go with The Great Escape. To me, TBOTRK is lacking in thrills, excitement, touching human drama, and stirring emotions. Yes, it's epic in scale and well-made, but it's almost impossible to truly enjoy. As far as subjective entertainment value goes, I'd give TBOTRK a 3/10 (the other two World War II flicks I mentioned earlier in this paragraph are both 10/10s). Yes, I am aware that posters are going to tell me to "go watch Transformers." I have not seen any of the Transformers pictures and do not intend on doing so any time soon. I just don't see how someone could be entertained by this frequently-boring film, can someone who does enlighten me on its merits?

[–] Kojiro_Vance 9 years ago

I like it. It is one of my favourite movies of all time. I recently even saw it on the big screen!

I like the feel of the movie, it has a nice atmosphere, the cinematography is excellent. And the story, to me, is one of the best ever in motion picture history. I like the way how at the end, the storylines come together.

But hey, it doesn't matter if you don't like it. It's all a matter of taste. I don't like The Godfather and people have been calling me names for that :)

[–] TheHestinator 9 years ago

Thank you for your intelligent, reasonable response. While I wouldn't go as far to say that I didn't like The Godfather, it did leave me cold, for the most part.

[–] killakippa 8 years ago

The phrasing of your question irritates me.

Notice how you include "Me" in the question emphasizing how important you are to the question, as if anyone here knows you and would be able to word their response to appeal to you specially. They don't. The subject here of this board is the film not you. You individually are insignificant here. You want to feel important and feed your narcissism go blab on Facebook. You use the noun "Me" when it's "you others" opinions and information you are actually seeking. But instead of using the noun "You" you relish in proudly using "Me!"

Here I'll offer an alternative way to word the question which helpfully takes your ego out of the equation, "What appeals to you about this Movie?" The noun "you" has proper usage here because it is "they" whose opinion you are enquiring about.

Twitter @killakippa

[–] TheHestinator 8 years ago

I think you may be over-analyzing matters (I've never even had a Facebook account), but I'll take your advice, and ask "What appeals to you about this movie?"

[–] Blueghost 9 years ago

I think largely because it is a ridiculous film in both story and plot. If you listen to the first hand accounts of the Bataan march, and the accounts of what POWs suffered under the Japanese military, you'll wonder how this film ever got made, or how it never got criticized or ridiculed.

[–] goleafsgo27 9 years ago

I'll try.
Just a decade after the war, people were evidently not ready to make nor watch a realistically graphic depiction of its horrors, so this film must, IMHO, be forgiven for only vaguely suggesting them. It does so with a dramatic story of the cross purposes of 2 British officers, and what their efforts cost in men's lives. It also reflects how unready audiences were then to see the Japanese as competent.
The story is compelling, the acting mostly terrific, the cinematography splendid.
Other WWII films were more realistic, but I think this may have been the first major, color spectacular, and as such, was highly honored.

I have seen enough to know I have seen too much. -- ALOTO

[–] SamHardy 9 years ago

As a master film maker David Lean understood that human drama was what draws people to a story. Action sequences really do not succeed without it. This film is absolutely loaded with human conflict. You mentioned The Guns Of Navarone. Watch it again. It is also loaded with human drama and conflict. Until the end there is very little action. To me it is one of the great movies because David Lean is a master story teller. For proof watch Lawrence Of Arabia.

[–] TheHestinator 9 years ago

I think I've seen The Guns of Navarone four times, and, yes it is filled with human drama and whatnot, but A. there's lots of action scattered throughout the runtime (you're never far from someone being shot, stabbed, blown up, or punched) and B. its drama is actually intriguing, thought-provoking, touching, and sincere. You really care about the characters and want to learn more about them. The drama in TBOTRK is boring, glacially-paced, and hollow-feeling, with characters I couldn't care less about.

Yes, I've seen Lawrence of Arabia twice, and it's a lot better than TBOTRK, but it's not one of my all-time favorites. I've only seen two David Lean films (TBOTRK and LOA, although I do have Doctor Zhivago and In Which We Serve on my Netflix queue), but I'm not sure if "master story teller" is my first (or second) impression. He seems more concerned with filming landscapes, extending runtimes, showing off his large budgets, and whatnot, rather than telling riveting stories.

[–] cdjunkee-1 9 years ago

I'm watching it now for the first time. So I may post back with my reaction.

You spoke of films rife with human conflict etc. I'm curious if you've ever seen other war epics such as "The Sand Pebbles", "Stalag 17", "The Great escape" as they share similarities. If so do you feel if they were well done or not up your alley. What did they get "right"?

~Keep on Trucking!~

[–] TheHestinator 9 years ago

Haven't seen Stalag 17 yet (although it is on my Netflix queue), but I loved The Sand Pebbles and, especially, The Great Escape. The Sand Pebbles really seems to care about the human drama it contains (unlike TBOTRK, where David Lean is more interested in the surrounding landscape or something), has truly excellent action scenes, has breathtaking cinematography, and moves along at a brisk pace. The Great Escape, well, pretty much gets everything right and is just about as close to perfection as movies get. The drama, suspense, action, cinematography, memorable characters, humor, pacing, all-star cast, locations, music, etc. are top-notch.

[–] Blueghost 9 years ago

by SamHardy » Sat Dec 26 2015 15:56:48 Flag ▼ | Reply |
IMDb member since January 2011
As a master film maker David Lean understood that human drama was what draws people to a story. Action sequences really do not succeed without it. This film is absolutely loaded with human conflict. You mentioned The Guns Of Navarone. Watch it again. It is also loaded with human drama and conflict. Until the end there is very little action. To me it is one of the great movies because David Lean is a master story teller. For proof watch Lawrence Of Arabia.

Who gives a damn? It doesn't gybe with reality which was far more loaded with human tragedy than you'll ever know.

[–] cfwente 9 years ago

"Reality" is the stuff of history books and documentaries, the "drama" is quite another thing. The former deals in what was or is, and the latter in what might have been or may be.

[–] Blueghost 9 years ago

What was is that you got shot or a samurai sword decapitating your head if you didn't work. I had family that witnessed it first hand.

[–] SamHardy 9 years ago

You must be very young and not seen very many films. Come back again in 20 or 30 years.

[–] Howlin Wolf 9 years ago

I appreciate it because for me it recognises both the endurance AND the futility of war - quite a tricky thing to do, as those two ideas at first thought would seem to be contradictory to one another... but they aren't. However, even if you did like the film, my reasons would doubtless still be different to yours... so it seems rather pointless to try to 'justify' it to you.



"Your mother puts license plates in your underwear? How do you sit?!"

[–] brianwhite5 9 years ago

You can't compare this film with the action war adventures you mentioned.
This is a war drama of the highest order and has many very special moments.
It epitomises British stiff upper lip and contains much British humour but the undertones are very dark.
I suppose if i was to compare this to another movie it would be the The Hill, Deer Hunter or Apocalypse Now.

[–] cfwente 9 years ago

Heart of Darkness figures prominently in this picture, too. As it does in Apocalypse Now.

[–] SforSmile 9 years ago

I agree with you, this movie is certainly not bad but too slow-paced for it's own good which is also due to a too long running time...
One war movie that is far better in terms of suspense imo that also deals with a bridge in its title is this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052654/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

"Some people are immune to good advice."
-Saul Goodman

"I ignore pathetic trolls"

[–] cfwente 9 years ago

"... this movie is certainly not bad but too slow for it'd own good ..."

"Too many notes." Just cut a few and it will be perfect."

Amadeus -- "Just which notes did you have in mind, Majesty?"

[–] mikekrit62 9 years ago

The "appeal" of any movie largely depends on whatever you as the viewer personally bring to the table as you view it. The fact that this movie has been considered a great movie for nearly 60 years, and is still highly regarded today means it has a broad and enduring appeal...just not for you.

To me, TBOTRK is lacking in thrills, excitement, touching human drama, and stirring emotions.

You also don't like the way the the Japanese are shown treating POWs.

So you seem to fully understand why you don't like this movie. Why do you need others to try and convince you otherwise? Or are you hoping that people who agree with you will come and validate your opinion?