Movies you find to be self-indulgent

[Figs]

When listing the films, actually put the reason or reasons why please.

I made this thread because I still don't quite get how a movie/film can be self indulgent. I can definitely understand when a director is being self-indulgent but it never made sense to me when numerous people over the years label a film this way.

What brought this on just now is because someone on another forum said this about The Hobbit, which I haven't seen yet of course.

 

[bullets]

I think it falls at the hands of the director. I've heard Tree of Life described as self indulgent , but that's Malick's style of film making. The best example for me is Ocean's Twelve. It seemed like everyone was having a good time except the audience.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

King f****** Kong (2005).

 

[Figs]

King f****** Kong (2005).

Can you explain why?

 

[Ultimatehero]

King Kong was AWESOME! Oh and definitely agree on Ocean's Twelve, i mean the whole twist was almost like the Ocean's team had conned the audience the entire time - you want to see them pull it off, not be the one it's pulled on.

If I had to name one - even though I liked the film - it would be JFK, I just think it would have been much better without big name actors in every part... it seemed like every twist and turn had another cameo in it. Almost like the casting was bigger than the story itself or at least overshadowed it.

 

[redhawk23]

Because there was a sense that many scenes could have or absolutely needed to be cut but weren't because Jackson basically hat carte blanch after LotR and Kong was his dream film. Many things were included that didn't serve the story, or the drama between characters and really weren't even that exciting in and of themselves.


And there were times where you could see how far they were going to force in little moments that never quite work.

One thing that always stuck out in my mind was the matter of Kong playing with the Vrex Jaw bone. In the original film, theres a shot after the battle between kong and the Dinosaur and Kong kind of sits and plays with the dead dinosaurs dislocated jaw. Jackson has spoken about it being one of his favorite parts of the film. In his film, he forced it in pretty awkwardly, where its after the fight, Kong's just defeated the Vrex, Kongs jumping around beating his chest, he stopps for just like 1 SECOND to play with the jaw and then goes back to roaring and beating his chest. Now that was something that didn't contribute to the over length of the film, but its indicative of so much else with the film where stuff was force in even if it didn't make sense.

 

[moviedoors]

King Kong '05 makes me cry like a baby, but it's certainly self-indulgent. The Jimmy/Hayes thing should have been cut or rewritten or something. It goes absolutely nowhere.

I agree on Oceans 12 too. That movie is entirely too pleased with itself.

Iron Man 2 pops into mind.

 

[redhawk23]

Watchmen. Definitely watchmen.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Can you explain why?

The entire first act is spent on Jack Black's useless character. It goes nowhere. He is exactly the same character at the end as he was in the film's inception, giving off the feeling that all the time spent on why exactly he chose to go to Skull Island feel pointless.

Useless significance is given to some of the other side characters. For example, what was the point of Jamie Bell's character arc? How did the screentime spent on him enrich the film?

Kong is a good film hidden under a great one. The emotional backbone -- that of Kong and Naomi Watt's "romance"-- of the film is hindered by those diversions. The film could've lost at least 45 minutes to its great benefit.

 

[redhawk23]

King Kong '05 makes me cry like a baby, but it's certainly self-indulgent. The Jimmy/Hayes thing should have been cut or rewritten or something. It goes absolutely nowhere.

I agree on Oceans 12 too. That movie is entirely too pleased with itself.

Iron Man 2 pops into mind.

The commentary for Iron Man 2 is a little disheartening as it makes it totally obvious where so many problems came from.

Like Hammer's inclusion in the film only taking place because they really really wanted to work in Sam Rockwell. It was after the story of the film was already laid out and they were just trying to work in Rockwell.

The editing of that film, especially the senate review scenes at the being sounded arduous where they just had tons and tons of footage and had to kind of sculpt it into something.

 

[moviedoors]

One thing that always stuck out in my mind was the matter of Kong playing with the Vrex Jaw bone. In the original film, theres a shot after the battle between kong and the Dinosaur and Kong kind of sits and plays with the dead dinosaurs dislocated jaw. Jackson has spoken about it being one of his favorite parts of the film. In his film, he forced it in pretty awkwardly, where its after the fight, Kong's just defeated the Vrex, Kongs jumping around beating his chest, he stopps for just like 1 SECOND to play with the jaw and then goes back to roaring and beating his chest. Now that was something that didn't contribute to the over length of the film, but its indicative of so much else with the film where stuff was force in even if it didn't make sense.

You're remembering that wrong. Kong doesn't interrupt the chest thump to play with the jaw, he does it pretty much immediately after snapping it and then there is the big triumphant chest thump. There is no interruption.

 

[redhawk23]

You're remembering that wrong. Kong doesn't interrupt the chest thump to play with the jaw, he does it pretty much immediately after snapping it and then there is the big triumphant chest thump. There is no interruption.

Yeah its, been a while.
Either way its super abrupt and pointless, where as its a nice moment in the original film.

 

[moviedoors]

The commentary for Iron Man 2 is a little disheartening as it makes it totally obvious where so many problems came from.

Like Hammer's inclusion in the film only taking place because they really really wanted to work in Sam Rockwell. It was after the story of the film was already laid out and they were just trying to work in Rockwell.

The editing of that film, especially the senate review scenes at the being sounded arduous where they just had tons and tons of footage and had to kind of sculpt it into something.

Didn't know that. Thats pretty much the definition of self-indulgent.

And just so were all on the same page, here is said definition:

self-indulgent
• (of a creative work) lacking economy and control.

 

[Figs]

From the few posts in here, basically self-indulgent is just another way of saying a movie is bloated?

 

[moviedoors]

From the few posts in here, basically self-indulgent is just another way of saying a movie is bloated?

They're at least in the same ballpark.

 

[Brother Jack]

Lady in the Water

Shyamalan cast himself in a role that had no bearing on the plot and just so happened to be world-changing writer or something. That movie officially signified the point where he had bought into his own hype.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

From the few posts in here, basically self-indulgent is just another way of saying a movie is bloated?

Moviedoors puts it perfectly: a creative work lacking in economy and control.

 

[Figs]

Moviedoors puts it perfectly: a creative work lacking in economy and control.

I guess my initial confusion came about because people were solely calling certain films self-indulgent and not the director. I guess it's one and the same though, if a movie is self-indulgent it's because the director was being self-indulgent while making it.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

You can make a case that the entire prequel trilogy is an act of self indulgence.

 

[Figs]

You can make a case that the entire prequel trilogy is an act of self indulgence.

Damn good point!

 

[redhawk23]

While I wouldn't necessarily say that this extends to the film, Andrew Stanton was certainly self indulgent in making John Carter, approaching it the same way he did animated films with pixar, going way over budget and over schedule and expecting to be able to do endless reshoots to tweak the story.

And then of course he demanded control of advertising images and such picking what got used for billboards and insisting onf Zepplin music for TV spots.

 

[redhawk23]

I thinks another way of looking at self indulgent films is giving into the filmmakers arguably worst tendencies, where they don't have to step out of their bubble and those tendencies don't always serve the film.

Many people would argue that Tim Burton has pretty much been stuck in this stage for a good 8 years now. I don't necessarily agree, but a case can be made.

[YT]bFzLRP8e4vE[/YT]

 

[Brother Jack]

I don't know if I would call Burton self-indulgent so much as overly formulaic. Kind of a creative ditch.

 

[dgnightwing]

I don't know if I would call Burton self-indulgent so much as overly formulaic. Kind of a creative ditch.

Creative ditch isn't even the right way to say it. It's like a creative grave. Even with that said, I really wouldn't say he is self-indulgent either.

Speaking of Peter Jackson, I would throw The Lovely Bones in there as well. The huge LOTR poster in the shopping mall scene and the scenes in heaven are increadibly indulgent.

 

[redhawk23]

How could I forget?

Star Trek: The Motion(less) Picture.

Just how many establishing shots of the Enterprise did one film need?

When 2001 did it, it was ballet, in this film its seriously 10+ minutes just approaching the ship.