Caught in the Middle

After watching this movie, I find myself caught in the middle and taking an opposite position than I usually do when defending movies against criticism. Often I can forgive what I consider subpar storytelling if the visuals are top-notch and interesting. I will defend visually interesting, but otherwise mediocre storytelling by saying "movies are first and foremost a visual medium", so the visual storytelling is just as, if not more important than the script.

But with Jules and Jim, even though it was visually interesting, I find myself thinking, "OK, I really didn't like the story or the characters. I found the story uninteresting and not particularly well told, and I felt loathing for the main characters. Sure, it was well shot and used some interesting editing, but the fact that it was well shot feels meaningless in the face of what I didn't like."

Ugh.

I know Jules and Jim is considered a classic. Supposedly (I browsed the boards for a few minutes) it has depth and it is one of those "the more you watch it the more you get out of it" movies, but I can't imagine spending the time watching it again.

The thing I enjoyed most about the experience, was seeing where Jeunet gets a lot of his influence.