MovieChat Forums > Winter's Bone (2010) Discussion > Not A Good Movie

Not A Good Movie

posted 13 years ago by RhodyDave
107 replies | jump to latest

I thought this was pretty poor. This is my review from my movie blog - http://reelcommentary.blogspot.com/ (with some words cleaned up for IMDB).

I wanted see this based on reading good things about it, so I watched it on Netflix last night. The story is about a 17 year old girl, Ree, who is trying to find her meth dealing father, as the family home is about to be taken away from them by bail bondsmen.

To complicate things, her father might be dead, her mother is nearly catatonic, and Ree has to take care of her younger brother and sister. Everyone in this movie is unlikeable except for Ree's siblings. All the characters are portrayed as violent, drug using, hillbillies. Now maybe this reflects true in certain families in Missouri, where this film is set, but it's not good for the main character to be so unpleasant. Yes, I thought she was an unlikeable character. Ree had been forced to become the caregiver to her mother and younger sibs, but other than doing that, which was less an act of nobility than an act of necessity, she displayed little that I felt was either smart or appealing.

The entire tone of the movie is somber. There are no indications that any of these characters will grow or have anything better in their lives. Everyone is resigned to the roles they've been born into. Drugs are all that these characters have to motivate them, either by selling, using, or manufacturing them.
As the movie came to an end, there was no redemption for anyone, no epiphanies, nothing learned by their suffering, and no hope for a future different than the past. It's a movie that shows only bleakness, only sorrow. The lack of any glimpse that Ree has some chance to escape this hell is what ultimately led me to the conclusion that this movie wasn't good. The acting is fine, and technically it's decent, but I didn't like anything about this movie or any of the characters. If I want to see stories about people doing awful things to one another, all I need do is turn the news on. I expect more of fiction than to merely tell me how *beep* up some people that I don't like are, or that drugs can *beep* people up and lead to misery. I know that - now show me something that has at least some revelatory quality to it. That would be a big step in the right direction, unlike Winter's Bone, which just seemed content to revel in s*** and try to pass it off as art.

Bring me four fried chickens and a Coke

[–] xoxoJulzxoxo 13 years ago

I will say that this review is pretty harsh. Yes, movies are, a lot of times, supposed to make you forget about reality. Other times, depending on the direction it is taken, they are supposed to make you think. Maybe the director didn't intend this, but, to me, this movie makes me think about the things I don't have to go through. It sheds light on the harsh reality that some teenagers actually do have to face. This story isn't shiny in any sense, but then, it wasn't made to be that. It was made to show how brutal and merciless people can be. Maybe the characters didn't learn anything, or find redemption, but they did what they had to do to survive. In the end, that's what this is about. Survival in its purest form, and a young girl struggling to save her family. The story isn't about the happy side of life. It is meant to show the struggles certain people have to face, and to make the audience realize that not everything is shiny and happy. The movie was art, in its truest form. It may not have had a beautiful quality to it, but then,the best "art" is brutal and honest and shows humans in their truest light.

[–] LebowskiT1000 13 years ago

Nice review, I had the same thoughts, but couldn't quite find the words to explain it. Very nicely done. My first thought when the credits started rolling was "You've got to be kidding me!?" "Nominated for Best Picture!?!?!" NO WAY!!!

Why build one, when you can build two at twice the price? - S.R. Hadden

[–] drew-155 13 years ago

I have to agree with OP. In order to pull the audience in, there has to be something compelling about the characters, and for me there's nothing. If the south fell into the ocean I wouldn't care. Well, save New Orleans, Chucktown and Savannah. The rest can evaporate. I have no desire to spend my valuable time watching movies about the south's miserable inhabitants wreched existence. The only good movie about the south is Mandingo.

The argument about escapism and entertainment... I think a lot of people miss the point. Movies don't have to make you feel good to entertain. They don't have to teach you anything. They don't have to uplift you. They DO have to entertain. In other words if they BORE you, they've lost you.

There are plenty of bleak movies (taxi driver, raging bull, requiem for a dream) where nothing really happens( 2 lane blacktop) that are incredibly engaging. But they either plug into a part of your brain that allows you to CARE about the action, or the characters are developed enough so you either love or hate them. There is none of that in Winter's Bore.

------------

'Slippy flappy suck sook!'--Lappy Slapsum, "The Rage of Friction"

[–] Indifferent_Observer 13 years ago

And that would be your opinion to which a whole lot of people disagree. This movie is shockingly realistic and an excellent character study. I am so glad that independent film exists to push out great realistic* films like this and not Hollywood happy endings. In real life there arent always happy endings,

And btw, your review shouldn't be taken seriously because it's nothing but opinion. You didn't take acting, production, shoestring budgets, realism, and character development into consideration. To you, the movie just revels in crap because there is no happy ending.

..oh and I was thoroughly entertained. Maybe this just isn't for you. I would watch Disney movies if you want nothing but mindless escape and happy endings.

God, I wish all our lives could be as happy and oblivious as yours.

[–] drew-155 12 years ago

I could take a picture of your ballsack nailed to the wall. Sure, it would be realistic, but who would give a *beep*? Only you, and other people who hate freedom, creativity and intelligence. Like I said, but you ignored, there are lots of great movies that don't have happy endings. The reason they don't suck is because of this thing called STORYTELLING.

You *beep* out your ears:
> And btw, your review shouldn't be taken seriously because it's nothing but opinion.

Show me a review that's FACT and I'll show you a bag of *beep* ALL reviews are opinion, you dumbass. It's just that SOME reviews are informed by a lifelong exposure to REAL cinema. REAL art. REAL creativity. Not the diarrhea you seem to enjoy. There was no acting, just partial drooling. Realism? Again, who gives 2 *beep* Character development?? ARE YOU *beep* KIDDING ME??? HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH!!! The happiest ending I could imagine would be that they all got set on fire and slowly died.

You were NOT thoroughly entertained. You LIE. You heard a bunch of turd burglars on TV say how good it was, and you aped them. I'm going to tell you something that is the truest thing you will ever hear. If a whole lot of people like something, it probably sucks. That truth has served me very well.

------------

'Slippy flappy suck sook!'--Lappy Slapsum, "The Rage of Friction"

[–] scriptshaker-1 12 years ago

So are we to understand from your explanation above that Winter's Bone was not a creative or imaginative story? Really? That tells us right there that something is lacking in your understanding of creativity means. Your definition is the equivalent of saying that Rembrandt's works are too lifelike to be considered art but Dali's surrealism is the benchmark.

You, dear friend, need to reexamine the definition of cinematic storytelling and "real art" because you clearly don't understand what it means. Please do yourself a favor and discover the works of John Cassavetes, Mike Leigh, Robert Altman and Jean-Luc Godard. While you're at it, crack open a dictionary and jump to "Cinema Verite".

"Real art" and creativity is not limited to extreme characters or implausible storytelling. Imitating reality is an art unto itself. If realist filmmaking isn't your cup of tea, that's too bad, but as others have pointed out: your opinion doesn't define what is and isn't real art.

[–] drew-155 12 years ago

Huh?? Can you read? Where did I say that 'realism' does not equal good art? How does my criticism of a single crappy movie mean that I hate realism in any film? I'm sorry I don't like the same movie that you do. Being able to survive a bad review of your favorite movie without getting butthurt is part of being a grown up and shows a real appreciation and understanding of art. Clearly you are traumatized. There's probably a 12 step out there for you.

Don't you dare lecture me about 'real art' with your pathetic examples. With the exception of Cassavetes, all you've done is prove how boring and pedestrian your tastes are.

Have you ever seen Two Lane Blacktop? Celine and Julie go Boating? Pretty much any Wim Wenders movie? I love those movies. Long, slow films. Beautiful films. Watch them and learn. You're probably searching google furiously, trying to figure out who I'm talking about because your community college film appreciation class never showed them.

------------

'Slippy flappy suck sook!'--Lappy Slapsum, "The Rage of Friction"

[–] e25171971 11 years ago

Okay, so you hate a portion of America and you let that color your opinion for you. That speaks more to you as an individual and your prejudices than it does to this movie.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] drew-155 9 years ago

No, you disregarded my review because you are a southern dullard who loves pickups and making it with family members.

------------

'Slippy flappy suck sook!'--Lappy Slapsum, "The Rage of Friction"

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] drew-155 9 years ago

I'm not prejudice. I'm postjudice. I live in the south and the people here are ignorant and boring. You should move here if you like it so much.

------------

'Slippy flappy suck sook!'--Lappy Slapsum, "The Rage of Friction"

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] grahamj3-40-42209 13 years ago

What's most interesting to me about this thread, is that, purely on an aesthetic level, I disagree with most of you.

1) This movie was not boring to me. The constant tension/suspense made it play out like a quiet/subtle thriller.

2) The ending felt very redemptive to me. Ree gets to keep her house and continue to serve the role she seems vindicated to inhabit. While the film is a somber drama, its certainly not a tragedy. There's extraordinary hope for the Dolly's future now that Ree has taken the role of matriarch.

I guess my biggest surprise is that BOTH of the films detractors and advocates have been quick to point out the lack of "happy ending" in the film. While it may not have been a cookie-cutter Hollywood romcom happy ending, it was certainly hopeful. The ending of this movie, at least to me, was FAR from depressing.

[–] drew-155 12 years ago

The film certainly looked good, and was at least produced well. I just did not care for the main characters, or about the story. To me that's the most important thing.
However, there are lots and lots of films that I love that have no real cohesive narrative, but are able to reach me in a very meaningful way. I can see this film working in that respect for some people. It just didn't work that way for me.

------------

'Slippy flappy suck sook!'--Lappy Slapsum, "The Rage of Friction"

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] drew-155 12 years ago

You have brilliantly summed this movie up.

------------

'Slippy flappy suck sook!'--Lappy Slapsum, "The Rage of Friction"

[–] wjm6292 12 years ago

ur nuts this is a good movie, one of the best of this year

[–] scriptshaker-1 12 years ago

Once again we hear from the Narcissists and/or trolls of IMDb. I hate to be the one to break this to you, but the world does not revolve around you and a film shouldn't try appeal to YOUR limited tastes. I can only infer this is what you believe since you posit that what you don't like is "bad". Good and bad entertainment are matters of opinion, not absolutes. Because you personally don't like a film because of its pacing, plot, realism, etc. does not mean the film isn't good; it simply means YOU didn't like it.

[–] RhodyDave 12 years ago

I'm not going to debate you whether a movie can be bad or not, but I will state that anyone with any critical thinking ability will agree that there are indeed 'bad' movies - not just ones that aren't liked by the viewer.

Bring me four fried chickens and a Coke

[–] ibrarules 12 years ago

@rhody

I will state that anyone with any critical thinking ability will agree that there are indeed 'bad' movies - not just ones that aren't liked by the viewer.

As you wisely put it in one of your posts: either entertain or engage and sadly WB did neither for you. So WB failed with you.

But if you believe that there are objectively bad (and I assume then good also) movies, WB clearly is a good one since most viewers and critics and colleagues/filmmakers agreed that it was a superior product.

Maybe your mood was wrong, maybe the topic doesn't interest you, maybe the acting bothered you etc. Watching a movie is a subjective experience.

Personally I loathed Schilnder's List, it failed to engage me and I thought it was too sugary in parts - that doesn't make me right and possibly I can be seen as being objectively wrong since most thought it was a Grade A product :)

[–] ffnogoodnik 12 years ago

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but the world does not revolve around you and a film shouldn't try appeal to YOUR limited tastes. I can only infer this is what you believe since you posit that what you don't like is "bad". Good and bad entertainment are matters of opinion, not absolutes. Because you personally don't like a film because of its pacing, plot, realism, etc. does not mean the film isn't good; it simply means YOU didn't like it.

scriptshaker, well then I would think that you have never thought a film was bad because you realize that it simply is YOU not liking it.. right?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0338337/board/nest/169002096?d=169002096#1 69002096

I do not see anywhere in that where you are saying you personally did not like "Playback" ,just that it is garbage.

I have never seen "Playback" myself but it did not take me long to find a post by you where you show yourself to be a hypocrite.

[–] mad_roke 12 years ago

Though I know why your review is picked apart easily (because you didn't get a sunshine ending) I admit, that I didn't enjoy the movie at all. It was just boring. It may be realistic and harsh and dark, but I didn't care for Ree at any moment. I really didn't. I don't think the movie is bad and people can't enjoy it, but for me it didn't do anything. Everything was dull and miserable and boring and yeah, if that's what you're into when you're watching a movie, then you'll enjoy the f out of Winter's Bone. I personally rarely view depressing movies, because life itself can be depressing enough and seeing these movies where you have no redemption or hope at all only make my own opinion of life a little darker. I didn't watch the movie on purpose. I went in a sneak preview with friends and we got into this movie. Most of the viewers weren't happy at all with the film. Then again it probably isn't a "sneak peek" for a bunch of friends, because you wanna have a good time. It would be like going to the movies and waiting for a fun movie, but ending up with I dunno Biutiful and get bored, depressed and unhappy (though the movie is great)

[–] janisvstr 12 years ago

There is no "boring", there's only "bored". Thank you...for your consideration.

[–] Deion-Sandals 12 years ago

I find it hilarious that people can't be entertained by a film simply bc it's grounded in reality and makes you have an emotional response. If you feel depressed after that means you just watched a good movie.

[–] worldriot 12 years ago

I'm sure Jay and Silent Bob films would be easier for you to figure out, don't hurt your head.