Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I found Mason, the main character, to be a very boring, uninteresting person who happened to like photography. I would hate to have to sit next to him on an airplane. Whoever it was who played him was a mediocre actor.
You follow him from the time he is 6 years old until he enrolls at a University – not at the prestigious and very selective University of Texas at Austin, but at the literally bottom tier Sul Ross State University. I had never heard of it.
We know that at the university he will follow his father's advice and not make the same mistake he did. Mason will wear a condom.
Although he had several step fathers, his real father never deserted him so he didn't have a very difficult childhood.
The movie seemed to be a never ending series of what might be called vignettes. Many were cliches such as kids arguing in back seats, alcoholic stepfathers breaking stuff, young boys looking at lingerie pictures in catalogs, older boys looking at naked women on the Internet, bullying in the boys room, getting lectured by adults about discipline and hard work, high school boys talking about sex, an old lady relative saying he should get rid of the earring, etc, etc. But most involved mundane conversations including a lot of sophomoric philosophizing.
Mason's cute girlfriend left him for an athlete. I was happy for her.
On my first night of watching, after it seemed that about an hour had passed, I checked the time on my Blu-ray player – I had only been watching for 25 minutes. I finally made it to the end on the third night, although by then I was using the fast forward to get through some of the really boring conversations.
This scripted movie is nothing like the series of documentaries starting with 7 UP that is is sometimes compared to. They followed a wide variety of real people, even some orphans, as they went through life.
The movie seemed to be a never ending series of what might be called vignettes. Many were cliches such as kids arguing in back seats, alcoholic stepfathers breaking stuff, young boys looking at lingerie pictures in catalogs, older boys looking at naked women on the Internet, bullying in the boys room, getting lectured by adults about discipline and hard work, high school boys talking about sex, an old lady relative saying he should get rid of the earring, etc, etc. But most involved mundane conversations including a lot of sophomoric philosophizing.
Don't forget: A family night out to get the new Harry Potter book.
I found Mason, the main character, to be a very boring, uninteresting person who happened to like photography. I would hate to have to sit next to him on an airplane. Whoever it was who played him was a mediocre actor.
You follow him from the time he is 6 years old until he enrolls at a University – not at the prestigious and very selective University of Texas at Austin, but at the literally bottom tier Sul Ross State University. I had never heard of it.
We know that at the university he will follow his father's advice and not make the same mistake he did. Mason will wear a condom.
Although he had several step fathers, his real father never deserted him so he didn't have a very difficult childhood.
The movie seemed to be a never ending series of what might be called vignettes. Many were cliches such as kids arguing in back seats, alcoholic stepfathers breaking stuff, young boys looking at lingerie pictures in catalogs, older boys looking at naked women on the Internet, bullying in the boys room, getting lectured by adults about discipline and hard work, high school boys talking about sex, an old lady relative saying he should get rid of the earring, etc, etc. But most involved mundane conversations including a lot of sophomoric philosophizing.
Mason's cute girlfriend left him for an athlete. I was happy for her.
On my first night of watching, after it seemed that about an hour had passed, I checked the time on my Blu-ray player – I had only been watching for 25 minutes. I finally made it to the end on the third night, although by then I was using the fast forward to get through some of the really boring conversations.
This scripted movie is nothing like the series of documentaries starting with 7 UP that is is sometimes compared to. They followed a wide variety of real people, even some orphans, as they went through life.
Whew... I'm with you, but don't know anyone who didn't like the movie, or at least claimed to like it.
Though I admit that something about Arquette's voice, tone, dialogue, sounds whiny to me, the movie itself stunk. I think in a few years, when the unique concept is put aside, viewers will wonder why the movie received such acclaim.
The movie seemed to be a never ending series of... mundane conversations including a lot of sophomoric philosophizing. On my first night of watching, after it seemed that about an hour had passed, I checked the time on my Blu-ray player – I had only been watching for 25 minutes.
There are a lot of successful films like this, though...."American Graffiti" being one. I remember thinking that "Broken Flowers" with Bill Murray was just a series of vignettes. "My Dinner with Andre" is one long conversation, and "Diner" has become a classic.
I guess the characters would have to appeal to the viewer. Frankly, I can't stand Hawke in this film, but I do think that the character he plays is interesting.
Well, I finally saw this film. I thought it was a great film, not just because of the concept (being filmed over a period spanning 12 years) but because of the way that the story unfolded. It did however drag on for too long. The pace was good at first, but then it just got slow. I did like the pop culture references that were included for each passing year. I liked seeing the changes in the clothing styles, the hairstyles, and the changes in technology as the years went by. The lead actor Ellar Coltrane did a great job, and IMO he should have been nominated for an Oscar (more worthy than Bradley Cooper). And while I admire Patricia Arquette (and she's a very pretty lady) I don't really get the hype over her performance in this film. I think her shining moment was in the scene near then end when she starts crying as Mason is about to go off to college - I loved her monologue during that scene, and I hope it'll be used as her Oscar clip at next month's ceremony. Of all the films from 2014 that I've seen thus far, I do feel that Boyhood is the best one, and I don't think that anyone can reasonably say that Birdman is a better movie than this.
Whew. I'm so relieved to read that there are at least a few others who didn't care for the movie. I just finished it a little while ago, and frankly I don't understand the appeal. Almost 3 hours of no actual story.
I found Mason, the main character, to be a very boring, uninteresting person who happened to like photography. I would hate to have to sit next to him on an airplane. Whoever it was who played him was a mediocre actor.
You follow him from the time he is 6 years old until he enrolls at a University – not at the prestigious and very selective University of Texas at Austin, but at the literally bottom tier Sul Ross State University. I had never heard of it.
We know that at the university he will follow his father's advice and not make the same mistake he did. Mason will wear a condom.
Although he had several step fathers, his real father never deserted him so he didn't have a very difficult childhood.
The movie seemed to be a never ending series of what might be called vignettes. Many were cliches such as kids arguing in back seats, alcoholic stepfathers breaking stuff, young boys looking at lingerie pictures in catalogs, older boys looking at naked women on the Internet, bullying in the boys room, getting lectured by adults about discipline and hard work, high school boys talking about sex, an old lady relative saying he should get rid of the earring, etc, etc. But most involved mundane conversations including a lot of sophomoric philosophizing.
Mason's cute girlfriend left him for an athlete. I was happy for her.
On my first night of watching, after it seemed that about an hour had passed, I checked the time on my Blu-ray player – I had only been watching for 25 minutes. I finally made it to the end on the third night, although by then I was using the fast forward to get through some of the really boring conversations.
This scripted movie is nothing like the series of documentaries starting with 7 UP that is is sometimes compared to. They followed a wide variety of real people, even some orphans, as they went through life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by apexgds
Whew. I'm so relieved to read that there are at least a few others who didn't care for the movie. I just finished it a little while ago, and frankly I don't understand the appeal. Almost 3 hours of no actual story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPD
Don't forget: A family night out to get the new Harry Potter book.
Riveting.
It was about as riveting as real life, and that's what this film was about.... the real life struggles and complexities of boyhood.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
