MovieChat Forums > Winter's Bone (2010) Discussion > Seriously....

Seriously....

posted 14 years ago by hiren_vekaria
190 replies | jump to latest

This was boring! Really boring! There was nothing! maybe the book was good but seriously...BORING! I've seen good films and this IMO does not deserve 7.5!

[–] lizcarlo87 10 years ago

I have known people who are similar so I can relate to the characters. It such realistic movie. It wasn't boring in the least for me. I really liked Rees character. Her character was very loving,strong and brave. She would always reject drugs when it was offered, take care of her brother, sister and her mom, and continue to risk getting hurt to keep a roof over her head and her family. Older siblings taking care of younger ones is actually a reality in some of these situations.

The little details were so correct. The way they fixed their hair, the way the yard looked, teaching younger sibling how to shoot, language they used, the way the houses looked on the inside and outside and the kind of cloths they wore. The accents were not cartoonish. The people looked like drug users and dealers. Its obvious they did this movie in Ozarks. The scenery is beautiful and directed so well. Missouri can have such beautiful scenery.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lizcarlo87 10 years ago

I like The Place Beyond The Pines, but I have not seen the other movies.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MelancholyPonyAndTheCircusBoy 9 years ago

For some people, anytime they have to use their brain it gets boring.

Done with fish.

[–] UnoriginalPoster 9 years ago

I'm 70 minutes into the film so far and it's been damn boring. 4 oscars noms? really???

[–] scootersite-1 8 years ago

I'm really surprised with all of the negativity in these reviews. The only valid negative I see with this film is it being marketed as a thriller which it clearly isn't.
But what really surprises me me is all of the bad acting comments. I won't bother arguing the merits of the film itself; it was a character driven movie with little action. That alone will turn off a lot of today's movie fans, but all of the criticism regarding the acting I find hard to swallow. I can't remember the last time I was so impressed as I was by some of the performances in this picture. I'd never even heard of Jennifer Lawrence before I saw this picture but I thought her performance was amazing. I also thought John Hawkes was especially good. How such an unimpressive, weak looking man could ooze such menace was, I thought, the definition of good acting. There were also some comments about the the army recruiter. I've never seen a recruiter doing his thing but I remember watching that small piece and thinking to myself at the time, damn...that just seems dead on.
Apparently I just don't have the "impeccable taste" that some of the other posters in this forum have been blessed with because I thought this was a great flick with exceptional acting.

[–] twelveboar 8 years ago

I agree. Great film seemingly lost on a lot of people. The book is great too- def worth picking up.

But mostly I agree with anyone praising John Hawkes. He's awesome in everything but especially great here. Teardrop is indeed menace incarnate. Of a similar vein, you might want to check out Martha Marcy May Marlene. He's scary as hell in that.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]