MovieChat Forums > 2046 (2004) Discussion > So boring!

So boring!

posted 19 years ago by stryder9898
166 replies | jump to latest

Oh god this movie was so boring. I don't know what it was about and don't even care.

[–] logaga 18 years ago

I loved this movie...mega fans of WKW, but I kind of know what you guys mean by its too slow... well many films these days tend to be slower and less "gripping" or "packed" as for the storyline... I think somehow it's meant to be that way, when it's slow, and not so in your face during the whole duration of the film, your mind will start to probably wander off a lil, and that gives you space to digest what you just saw, think about how you're taking the film, try to udnerstand more what the characters are probably thinking...and that helps you understand or get into the film more for the later parts...

just my thoughts... anyways... my favourite WKW is Happy Together !! it's too overlooked... it deserves so much more attention!

[–] xavizen 18 years ago

guys, theres a great topic in the cars board... its about ... you know, cgi, and stereotype cars, and its not a little bit boring stuff!

by the way this movie rocks.

[–] fanisl 18 years ago

3 Words: Poetry in Motion

[–] lcormack 18 years ago

When I read these forums it is because I am bored and depressed.

I find the anger of some posters so depressingly pointless.

Only lonely, bitter and suppressed people get angry at faces they cannot see or speak with. Only stupid people hurl insults because they cannot use wit or common sense.

I find it even more depressing that I am posting a post here.

I love sad and poetic movies. I would like to see 2046. It will probably remind me of 'Spirited Away'...

[–] Chunli_injections 16 years ago

It's not made for people with no artistic taste. :) Honestly I wouldn't find most people who would enjoy WKW movies. He's an auteur for one thing, and I know he'll attract certain audience of some sort.

[–] Bale-Pearce-Oldman 18 years ago

It's all about timing when watching this film. I like 2046. Actually, I like it better than In The Mood For Love. And let's admit it, not all people can appreciate and will like a Wong Kar Wai film.

[–] robby_L 18 years ago

Then you are just stupid!! i fell sorry for you....

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jarquin 18 years ago

PRETENTIOUS, WANNABE

maybe these words sound a bit harsh. but i cant helpt it.
i wanted to like this movie. on hour into it and the next hr was fast forwarded.

although i agree that wkw is one of the best directors. and some of his work can be attributed as POETRY IN MOTION(as some here put it). 2046 is not.

although it has it moments(hardly a few) & cinematography is incredible(probably the reason pple call it poetry in motion). thats all.

wkw is a darling at cannes. i believe that 2046 film is riding on the success of his previous films and wkw's image.

if u really watch 2046 just as a movie, the way its supposed to be(i mean forget wkw and his previous films), then theirs nothing to it really. then it looks like an amateur trying to play intellect.

one more thing...........plz people don call a movie good or bad. just tell whether you liked it or not. no one can say whether a particular movie was good or bad.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Niide 18 years ago

as a cinephile i tell to the film student: CHANGE YOUR SUBJECT
or what movies do you like?? the 50cent movie????

[–] happinessonline 18 years ago

I've seen this movie three times in the theater when it was showing here. Then I bought the DVD and I saw it again 3 or 4 times.

Each time I see the movie again, I notice new details and new possibilities of interpretation. It's exactly the same with in the mood for love, though i must admit i also liked ITMFL because of Maggie Cheung in her chinese dresses :)

The three best movies of the 2000s have been shot in Asia so far:
1) 2046
2) Yi Yi
3) ITMFL

Well, at least, that's how I see it :)

[–] QueenNadine 18 years ago

>>As a film student I could go into great depth as to why this film is utter *beep* i just didnt feel it worth wasting my breath.<<

Oooh, an authority... someone who knows more than we do! Seriously, if you want to elevate yourself, call yourself a film professor- what makes you think we're not all already film studies graduates...?

Nadine :)

[–] imwithstupid_35 18 years ago

Yeah, this movie is just not up to snuff. WOng's other works are far beyond this.

my ymdb site

http://www.ymdb.com/mehsuggeth/l35858_ukuk.html

[–] chao_22 18 years ago

I'm surprised that so many people find it to be boring! I was expecting a bunch of uber fans to come to this movie's defense.

I too found it to be boring. I really, really wanted to like it. I watched it with my boyfriend, who is a fiend for artistic movies, and we both kept falling asleep. It was pretty, at least.

[–] gavintan777 18 years ago

yo
i am a chinese and frankly, i didn't really get the lesson from the movie...anyone willing to enlighten me on that? From what I see, it is about giving up your past and welcome changes??? At the last part, Tony Leung told Zhang Zhiyi that he'll never give up something...what was that? His chastity?

Thanks

[–] remescen 18 years ago

Yeah it WAS extremely boring...but what I did see was very pretty. If it was a little tighter maybe I could have invested more interest in the characters and the feelings WKW was trying to convey. I personally loved every bit of every scene from the futuristic novel, those were rare gems in this film. Otherwise I couldn't stand it, I only finished it to see more of the pretty pictures. :)

This is my first Wong Kar Wai movie, if you don't count the Six Days video. I am very interested in seeing his other films, despite my not liking this. I hear they are more accomplished, and still very visual.

This man should make a sci-fi...it would rival even Blade Runner in greatness, no?

"Hey, pretty girl, time to wake up."
-The Cowboy, Mulholland Dr.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] KyleWest 18 years ago

living in the united states I had to wait until about september 05 to see this.....I had been looking foward to it liek you wouldn't believe. I watched a good hour of the movie and I found that it was so boring that I had to turn it off and do something else.....Maybe I lived the hype way too far up, but I thought it was boring.

[–] dogout43 18 years ago

I thought that "In The Mood For Love" was boring, even though I still liked it. This film, I didn't find boring at all.

"What do you want?"
"To kill you."
-LE SAMOURAI

[–] Redknife 18 years ago

poor litlle childy puppies!!!To watch and understand this film,is not like watch the 80% of the film that are on cinemas today.You need concentration.It's not for all poor puppies.

[–] brielle_jalexa9 18 years ago

I agree stryder9898. I was bored to frustrated tears Also, for all the people who say if you watch 'In The Mood For Love' you'll understand this movie better. Well if you have to watch one movie to understand another, and it's not a sequel or a prequel, you know the film has failed. An independent film should be just that, independent and not rely on any explanation beyond within it's self.

"Oh man, I just shot marvin in the face."

[–] dogout43 18 years ago

"Independent film" doesn't mean independent of other movies, it means independent from studio funding, and in Vincent Gallo's case, independent from any help at all. Werner Herzog said that there was no such thing as an independent film, but, according to Herzog's definition of independent film, Gallo proved him wrong with "The Brown Bunny." But anyway, I love "2046," I thought it was way better than "In The Mood For Love."

"What do you want?"
"To kill you."
-LE SAMOURAI

[–] brielle_jalexa9 18 years ago

That's not what I meant but I knew it would be confused. I meant the film is an independent movie in the sense that it was never said that it is a sequel or a prolouge to another film. It should be able to stand on it's own, and not need the help of another film to make it understood. You should never have to look for answers beyond the film.

"Oh man, I just shot marvin in the face."

[–] dogout43 18 years ago

I saw "In The Mood For Love," as I said, but I didn't think that "2046" required seeing that film to be understood. Maybe it did, though.

"What do you want?"
"To kill you."
-LE SAMOURAI

[–] brielle_jalexa9 18 years ago

some people above did though. i was addressing them.

"Oh man, I just shot marvin in the face."

[–] PassTheMiike 18 years ago

I don't understand how anyone could find this film boring. I was completely engulfed from beginning to end. It was like watching beauty itself unravel before my eyes for two hours. Beautiful beautiful beautiful. Not quite 'In the Mood for Love', but beautiful nonetheless.

[–] columbiatch 18 years ago

I can't understand why people would find this boring neither. Maybe WKW is an aquired taste. Anyway in order to fully understand Chow and Lulu's character you have to watch Days of Being Wild and In the Mood for Love first. WKW should have labeled these as a trilogy because the amount of references made between these three movies. For example, Chow in this movie shows flashes of Yuddy's character in Days of Being Wild. The structure of the movie may be confusing to people who haven't see WKW's Ashes of Time. I think that 2046 is WKW's most mature film and the best one in the 60's trilogy.

[–] PassTheMiike 18 years ago

Definitely his most mature, but not his best from what I've seen of him.

[–] lilcasskid 18 years ago

Lets face it the previews made it look 100 times more amazing then it was. It was like watching a colonge commercial for like 3 hours...people crying and looking like they just had sex...

[–] Tyler_Durden_pt 18 years ago

I found the film much better than I was expecting. It's full of interesting character texture and detail.

[–] AbbyLaPokka 18 years ago

I've watched about 45 minutes, and so far it's got nice visuals, but it's way too artsy and WAY too slow.

Like the post said: Boring.

I'm gonna stick it out, though...

[–] Tyler_Durden_pt 18 years ago

I'm not sure what "way too artsy" means, the film seems to me standard Wong Kar-wai style and structure. So, yes, it's slow. Personally I don't have a problem with slow films. I'm not in a hurry.

[–] phantom_of_the_opera0 18 years ago

It was way too slow!
It had some nice pictures but the story din't evolve at all!
I d say boring and mediocre

[–] Tyler_Durden_pt 18 years ago

Like I said several times, it's not about the story. Wong Kar-Wai doesn't even use a script. It's like Godard, but with characters and situations I actually find interesting. To each his own, but I loved this film.

The way of the future. The way of the future... The way of the future.

[–] PassTheMiike 18 years ago

Agreed with Tyler. Kar Wai's films tend to lend themselves more to the presentation more than the story itself.

[–] phantom_of_the_opera0 18 years ago

yes but i guess he could have done it better
He surely could but this film is missing some elements that make a film attractive!

[–] AbbyLaPokka 18 years ago

I finished the film. Sadly, I didn't see anything interesting about it.
The visuals were great, but great visuals aren't enough to make a great movie.
I think a bit more explanation about... well, everything would have developped the story more.
And then there were the camera angles. They were so claustrophobic! You never see someone in the center of a shot, and almost never two people in the same shot at once, unless of course, they're having sex. The whole half-shot thing was pretty cool-for the first ten minutes. Then it got pretty annoying.
That said, I'm still glad I watched it. The story was good, but the movie never realized its full potential.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] columbiatch 18 years ago

WKW made it look claustrophobic on purpose. It lends more to the mood of the film. As for explanations, if you pay attention to the movie you would pick up most of the explanations you need to know. The more obscure references are from WKW's earlier films Days of Being Wild and In the Mood for Love. WKW adopted the claustrophobic look from In the Mood for Love. All three are excellent movies.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Burhou_434 18 years ago

I can't believe so many people posted to such a retarded topic post. i only read the last post before mine, and judging by that I can see what everyone's been talking about. Jeez you guys, we know this is a great movie, one guy/girl who shows up and types "So boring" doesn't change that. Let him/her mope alone. Do you know how hurt he or she would have been if no one responded? hahaha, that would have been wonderful.

[–] AbbyLaPokka 18 years ago

As I said before, it was a very pretty movie, I just didn't find it very engaging at all. I guess everyone has different tastes. And that doesn't make them mopey. That makes them have a different opinion than you do.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cbebop7 18 years ago

WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN! I used to tell people that it was the worst movie ever but that is an unfair assumption because I haven't seen every movie. But it makes the bottom movie on my list by far. I can't begin to contemplate how this movie got anything over a 5 rating but as it stands now it is an absurd 7.5. I gave this movie a solid 1 without trying to be cheap and weigh down the ratings.

[–] jnagarya-1 15 years ago

phantom_of_the_opera0 (Wed Sep 6 2006 13:01:24)

It had some nice pictures but the story din't evolve at all!
_____

Neurosis is doing the same thing over and over and over and expecting a different result each time. Chow is similarly locked into a circularity: he does the same thing, again and again, while pushing away the very thing he actually believes he wants.

There is no need for the story to evolve, because it isn't about "progress". Or about "resolution" of conflict. The only apparent "evolutions" are of the Faye Wong and Zhang Ziyi characters: the first apparently ends up happy, whereas Tony Leung manages to put Zhang Ziyi's character into the same place he's in: wishing "it" could have gone on longer, and unable to let "it" go, therefore unable to live in the present.

[–] chocholalali 18 years ago

wong kar-wai is almost my hero. i loved Chung King Express, Days of Being Wild, In the Mood for Love, Happy Together, but 2046 really bored me to death. I'd say my least favorite out of all Wong's movies.

[–] Lu_tz 18 years ago

Even over Ashes of Time??? 2046 was like Ashes of Time 2 only that it was made better!!! (Sorry to be so shallow)....

[–] sg333 18 years ago

Watching films is about timing, especially films like this one. If you go into a film with a preconceived mindset, then you won't enjoy it. You have to let yourself go. If you try to force feed this film, you will end up hating it. I have to admit the first time I saw this, I really didn't like it. I wasn't in the mood for an artsy film. But watching it again made me realize how beautiful this film is. It is so well crafted and meticulously put together. It blew me away when I started to pay attention.

[–] Lu_tz 18 years ago

I really like this movie. I really liked it the first time I watched it. I still like it when I watch it on DVD. I disagree with your point. I think good cinema can change your mood. I think no matter what mood you are in or at what time you see it some movies are *that* good that they just change your mood around. I always define a good movie by how little I had to try to enjoy it. Sometimes you can like a movie with no effort. This doesn't mean that they have to be simple or not challenge the audience or even make general good sense. Sometimes movies are just good and not ponderous.

[–] AbbyLaPokka 18 years ago

I went into this movie expecting it to be boring, and I got exactly what I expected.