this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2026
333 points (97.2% liked)

Not The Onion

20333 readers
1328 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BigMilk13@lemmy.world 92 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

thumbnail of The Brutalist (4 hrs long) okay perhaps not the best example

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 34 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And not exactly 4 hours of easy watching.

[–] SweepTheLeg@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's not for the Marvel crowd but it's an amazing movie wIth world class cinematography and it sucks you in.

It didn't seem like 4 hours at all to me.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

yeah i didn't regard it as a particular difficult film at all.

but people are different and at different levels. tons of people in this thread seem to flip out at the notion some films aren't for everyone. not everyone reads at the same grade level, but for some reason the idea of films being at different levels is very offensive to folks.

running a marathon is a lot harder than running a mile. and we have people who can't run a mile telling us marathons are stupid and shouldn't exist.

[–] SweepTheLeg@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Thanks for explaining that different people like different movies. Truly groundbreaking stuff, right up there with the marathon metaphor.

[–] milk@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not a film student but I assume that long, comparatively difficult films by Tarkovsky, Ozu, etc are a lot of what the film students are watching and I would imagine that the professors are commentating on more recent developments

[–] Naz@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Tarkovsky films are incredible but are a "watch once in your lifetime" sort of deal.

I asked my grandmother if she had seen STALKER and she said yes, when it came out in theaters, like 40 years ago (in the USSR), and I asked if she was interested in re-watching it with her grandkids

She said: "No. It's a very difficult film. A very difficult film. You watch it only once because you don't get the same feeling a second time"

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I watched it like thrice and it only got better and more fascinating on every rewatch.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

that's weird. i've watched many of them multiple times.

[–] DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

That may be true but the example in the article, Jules et Jim, is under 2 hours long.

[–] kieron115@startrek.website 2 points 1 week ago

Right? They should be making them watch the entire Lord of the Rings extended trilogy instead.