Hidden Figures : Yaaaaaawn

I will probably get a lot of hate for saying that, but try to see the movie as a movie (a work of art, not about a specific historical event or period).

As a non-US-American who has had no first-hand experience of segregation and racism against Afro-Americans I must admit that this movie might be of interest to US-citizens, but for the rest of the world it is just another story dragging so-called unknown heroes into the spotlight. We have seen that so many times by now and these films always use the same old clichs that it gets quite tiring.

I found the movie extremely boring and just watched it because its Acadamey Award nomination.

I doubt that it will gain much recognition outside the USA and will soon be forgotten by the rest of the world.

And I have also no doubt that the three films nominated with predominantly Afro-American actors were specifically made for the 2017 Oscars after last year's controversy, not to raise important questions about race and prejudice (btw I really liked the other two (Moonlight and Fences) very much, not because of their racial issues, but because they tell stories about interesting individulas in original ways). In contrast to these two Hidden Figures does not stand a chance from an artistic point of view.

Just my 2 cents.

Enjoy the movie, it won't do you no harm - it's just not for me.

Nali*

My list: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls053994183/?start=1&view=grid&sort=created:desc&defaults=1&lists=

You're very brave to post what you did.

I really wish you the best and hope everything works out for you.

---

And I have also no doubt that the three films nominated with predominantly Afro-American actors were specifically made for the 2017 Oscars after last year's controversy

---

You do realize that this movie was already in pre production when the Oscar nominations came out last Jan, right?? The movie went into production in March, so how in the world was this movie made in response to the "Oscar So White"??? I'll wait


If you think a studio green light scripts and start filming in a matter of 2 months, you are an idiot lol.

Was the plot line slow? Was it the subject matter? (Math? Computers? Rocket trajectories? Segregation?) Was it the performances? The editing? The accuracy of the period depicted? The directing? Did you view the film at the end of the evening?

During its limited release in 25 theaters from December 25, 2016 to January 5, 2017, the film grossed $3 million. As of January 29, 2017, Hidden Figures has grossed $104 million in the United States and Canada and $2.5 million in other territories for a worldwide gross of $106.6 million, against a production budget of $25 million.

I do not doubt the figures you researched, but do you think that a successful box office equals artistic merits ?

I could go into a lot of details of what bothered me, but let's focus on the main aspect, i.e. that you could see every scene coming from miles away - and I mean EVERY scene (e.g. the delayed response of Glen after reentry into the atmosphere, Glen insisting on the math prodigy to check the numbers (and noone else!), the math prodigy demonstrating her excellent qualities in the meeting room on the blackboard, the romance etc.

All these aspects that you mentioned are all pitch perfect: the subject matter, the performances, the editing, the period details, the direction - with one exception: the script, i.e. the plot line for the reasons given above. It is a typical, perfect mainstream Hollywood movie and I found it awfully boring, because not one single scene challenges you to think / reflect / doubt / consider / evaluate what you see - and that is imho what art should do. It is perfect as it is - a normal fast food meal which does not aspire to be haute cuisine. But if you as a consumer want more, you go and eat at a different place.

Thanks for your polite response. As I tried to emphasize: it is just my opinion and reaction to the movie, because I want to be challenged (which Moonlight (e.g. the structure of the movie) and Fences (e.g. the character played by Denzel Washington) did).

Nali*

My list: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls053994183/?start=1&view=grid&sort=created:desc&defaults=1&lists=

The gross receipts are initial figures for a film that's been in wide release for three weeks. We have to see how the numbers change over two months to get any idea.

---

"You might get the indication in the movie that these were the only people doing those jobs, when in reality we know they worked in teams, and those teams had other teams," author Margot Shetterly explained. "There were sections, branches, divisions, and they all went up to a director. There were so many people required to make this happen. But I understand you can't make a movie with 300 characters. It is simply not possible."

---

from http://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/hidden-figures/ which lists the fictional elements of the film.

Predictable and simplified plot, fast food cuisine: sounds like a screenplay trying to reach a younger audience.

---

Predictable and simplified plot, fast food cuisine: sounds like a screenplay trying to reach a younger audience.

---

Interestingly, another critic insists that young people won't like this movie because there are no Transformers or Jedi Knights in it!

But I think you have a point there, because another element that bothered me was that it felt like a lecture for those who hadn't paid attention at school by carefully answering the questions "What was segregation again?"

So we have scenes showing

- residential areas
- washrooms
- high-schools
- workplace
- libraries
- cafeteria
- a water fountain
- the coffee machine.

Certainly I forgot a few other scenes, but each time I was shaking my head and thinking "Really? That, too, had to be shown?"

Nali*


My list: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls053994183/?start=1&view=grid&sort=created:desc&defaults=1&lists=

---

So we have scenes showing

---

Astounding. A movie about their working lives dealing with segregation, and you complain about scenes in the workplace! Why wouldn't they go to those places? Would you have preferred

- porno bookstore
- top of the Empire State Building
- Mount Rushmore
- a basement in New Jersey
- a hot dog stand
- a hot dog stand in a pet store
- a dog in a pet store standing on its head?

Assuming that your question is real (and not meant as a kind of provocation), actually I would.

Whereas I knew about segregation concerning the aspects I mentioned, I don't know anything about those you enumerate.

Where there different sections in porno bookstores? Where there different elevators in the Empire State Building, different areas on the platform, different time slots? Did hot dog stands for Afro-Americans exist? What about Mount Rushmore? (I consider your other two suggestions as quite humorous) If you could enlighten me on these questions I would honestly be quite grateful, since I don't know anything about them and it is very difficult to find such information.

Had the movie dealt with these aspects I would have learned something new and interesting. It would have certainly improved my overall impression of the film.

Thanks in advance.

Nali*

My list: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls066656748/?start=1&view=grid&sort=created:desc&defaults=1&lists=

You honestly want a movie about three women's working lives to not spend any time in the workplace? (And not meant as a kind of provocation)?

So a movie about a race car driver that shows him racing is cliche? A movie about the president that shows him in the oval office is offensively predictable? If this is honestly the way you feel, you should probably read the plot descriptions a little more closely, and avoid these types of movies in the future

And yes, I was joking with my list, because your suggestion seems so utterly random.

And are you saying that you knew all about these women's lives before you saw the movie, and you knew everything they did at NASA? Because the whole point of the movie is that very few people knew they even existed, much less their importance in the space program!

I am not mainly complaining about the workplace (that's where most of the action takes place), but let's take the library scene: It is completely without context, you never get to know what and why Dorothy Vaughan needs a specific book. So what is the purpose of this scene other than showing segregation in that specific area?

The scene on the bus: Why are they suddenly taking a bus? In all the other scenes they drive cars, suddenly they are on a bus? Why? The dialogue in that scene could have taken place anywhere, even in their car on their way to/from work?

The fountain scene: completely without context, not even one of the protagonists is in it.

Did you notice that in the last two scenes the signs reading: For Colored People Only (or slight variations of that) feature prominently? I am not denying the fact that these were true elements of segregation, but I deny their necessity for the plot.

If you can give me reasons for including these three scenes in terms of the plot and not without the aim of providing information for the uneducated viewer, I'd be most grateful.

And no, I had never heard of these three women before, but I have never heard of any members of the NASA-staff before either (apart from the names of some astronauts and Wernher von Braun). Perhaps that is my fault and my lack of education. Do you know other members playing important roles in the space program spontaneously (without googling them now that I am asking :) ?

If - as the movie implies - the space project was not a gigantic team effort, but depended solely/mainly on these three women (see the Glen mission), can we then also conclude that Katherine Johnson was responsible for the deaths of three astronauts in 1967 in Apollo 1, because this time she did the maths wrong?

As I stated above, I watched this movie because it was nominated for the Academy Awards, so I watched it not out of personal interest, but out of curiosity why it was nominated, but I knew what I was in for, because these types of movies have typical plot lines and features. What I got was what I expected, one of the worst "unsung-heroes" movies without even the slightest attempt at varying the formula. (This - by the way - seems to be a typical Hollywood genre. If you can name any non-US-American movies that deal with a similar subject, please let me know - I'd be most interested).

But I won't let you off the hook so easily ;) - I am really interested about porn bookstores and the Empire State Building. If you have any information on these, please let me know.

Thanks for your kind reply, although we disagree. Your defending the movie is completely legitimate (as is my criticism). It is just very interesting to find out why and on what we disagree.

I want to stress again, that I personally did not like the movie, which does not mean that it is a bad movie, it is just not my taste and it can be quite educational for certain people. But - sorry to repeat myelf - I was bored to death.

And one should take this movie for what it is: a typical, well-made Hollywood movie, that does not want to challenge you in any way, but is pure entertainment with a slight veneer of a certain historical period pretending to convey an important political message.

Nali*

PS: Some of the more negative reviews here reflect more or less exactly what I am saying; perhaps you read some of them to better understand my point of view - not to change your opinion. See e.g. the reviews by M Campbell, Barry Nester, trublu215

My list: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls066656748/?start=1&view=grid&sort=created:desc&defaults=1&lists=

---

It is completely without context, you never get to know what and why Dorothy Vaughan needs a specific book. So what is the purpose of this scene other than showing segregation in that specific area?

---

Seriously??
My understanding was that Dorothy saw this new IBM machine and was curious to know and learn how it works. She figured out the program it uses and sought to learn more about the program. Now where else can one find reference books to learn about anything???

This happened in an era where there was segregation and I really complement the producers and directors for showing aspects of segregation that these women had to deal with while staying focused on the contributions these women made to NASA.

Almost every place was segregated at the time. Dorothy went to that library probably because libraries meant for blacks (if there were any at all) obviously didn't carry books in that category. She took the bus for whatever reason. Maybe she was having car trouble, who knows? People have trouble with their cars every day and have to commute by other means.

These women did not live in isolation. They lived in a "segregated society" at the time so everywhere they went, it was necessary for the director to depict how their environment was at the time. It makes it real and genuine.

What makes this movie so appealing to a lot of people was that despite all the racism and segregation, these women chose to focus on SOLUTIONS, while trying to overcome the obstacles in their way. Alongside them, white people also helped to support them and encourage them and they all worked together to achieve a common goal.

I know it can be quite upsetting and rattling to some people to see the horror of segregation/racism which happened during that time but there is a saying;

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."

God knows we need more movies like these in times like this because it feels like we might be going back in time.

SMH

I stand corrected - you are right about the book.

For the rest I quote a review (with source) b M Campbell on this board here:

"Much of the atmosphere of racism in the movie did not ring true for me. In many cases it didn't even make sense, so I looked into it. The first question I had for the internet was "Did Katherine Goble have to run half a mile to use a bathroom on the NASA complex?" The answer is no. For more info on the conditions and life of Katherine Johnson check out the interview with her here: https://youtu.be/r8gJqKyIGhE. In particular check out 11:49 where she says she "didn't feel segregation". Everyone was working. The job was important and they weren't going to jeopardize the mission with foolish racist antics. She was part of a team. I would've liked to have heard so much more about Katherine and her mind and work, less about the social issues of the 1960s! "

The youtube link works - but the interview was, of couerse, done before the movie was made.

Nali*

My list: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls066656748/?start=1&view=grid&sort=created:desc&defaults=1&lists=

I'm black, I'm American, and I completely agree. The word "cliche" describes this movie perfectly. I was shocked by how underwhelming, typical and boring it was, considering all the hype. While the story itself is pretty inspiring and important, the formula and typical nature of the screenplay made me feel like I had seen it dozens of times before.

I'm non US but I have really enjoyed this. As I was saying in another thread I didn't find it extraordinary or moving, but I found it really nice, never boring and well acted.



"Please, if you are trying to convert me, this isn't a good time"

I've already critiqued the movie as cliche 3 days ago in the thread where someone hoped for a screenplay nomination.

Nevertheless, by the end, I was moved by the film and have no problem with its nomination, considering the field of contenders these days.

Of course it isn't art; As I said before, it lacks subtext, strong figurative expression and the elevation one would expect from art. And yes, very obvious and pandering even manipulative in some scenes. .

But most of the nominees for the Academy these days are sadly not art. They are simply serviceable expressions of craft and moderate storytelling technqiue. Particularly for true stories, dramatizing social issues and history has often been enough to get the Academy's attention.

______________________________________________________________________
"I thought you were class,like a high note you hit once in a lifetime."- Young Man With a Horn(1950)

ACADEMY award, not Academey.

Boring? You have to be a Troll.
Good grief.
It is one of the best, most inspiring and entertaining movies we have seen in years.
It was not designed to "please the young folk "! I am 75 years old and I remember the racism and the NASA adventures and the competition with the Russians and the astronauts.
It was amazing and timely and inspiring!

In my opinion, it doesn't look like anybody on this board is being a "troll."

To me, it looks like people are giving an honest critique of the movie. Some of the responses may have been a little heated and instigating, but as an impartial observer, it looks like people are going out of their way to be respectful.

We all don't share the same experiences in life. This film may resonate more for some than it does for others. I enjoy listening to people debate cuz I like to learn or discover things I haven't thought of before.

Unfortunately, too often, people get angry that others don't share their same opinion. And whenever it comes to a delicate issue, people may infer things.

I'll never understand why people get upset on IMDB whenever a movie they like isn't absolutely praised. Why not respect everybody's opinion and have a friendly debateminus the name calling?

---

In my opinion, it doesn't look like anybody on this board is being a "troll."

---

Then you must have just shown up here. Because the past month has been filled with racist people who are offended by this movie because it shows black people in a positive light, sexist people offended by the strong, smart women, history buffs offended by the fact that this isn't a documentary, people convinced that this film is a financial loss-leader for the government's social agenda, and smokers who are offended because everyone isn't lighting up a Pall Mall in every scene.

It's been ridiculous, and a lot of those threads have been deleted.

The problem is that if someone mentions things that are poorly done that have nothing to do with race - they're still called racist here. They said they disliked the movie because the writing stunk, which is extremely accurate. Nowhere in any of their responses (from what I saw) did they put down an entire race or say this movie is bad because of the color of the actors skin.

It's possible for a movie starring African Americans to be bad. Saying so doesn't mean your racist, it means that for whatever reason you didn't like the movie that happened to star black people.


'Get yourself a real dog. Any dog under 50 lbs is a cat and cats are pointless' - Ron Swanson

---

Nowhere in any of their responses (from what I saw) did they put down an entire race or say this movie is bad because of the color of the actors skin.

---

Your first post here was just a few days ago. It's possible you missed the worst of it. One person was claiming that the federal government bankrolls a "fictional" black history movie for release every January to show in schools for free and indoctrinate the youth of America. Others were offended that with all the people in the space program, that Hollywood focused on three black women.

---

They said they disliked the movie because the writing stunk, which is extremely accurate.

---

I haven't seen that. Someone blamed the screenwriters and their lack of research because Glenn's Mercury spacecraft is oriented the wrong way, as if they had anything to do with the special effects.

I don't agree that the writing stunk. They did a good job condensing a lot of people and stuff happening over many years into a tight, cohesive story.

Very possible I missed the influx of racist posts, I wouldn't doubt that. I just haven't personally seen it (which is probably a good thing haha). However

---

I haven't seen that [a critique on the writing being the main flaw].

---

From OP's reply a few pages back:

---

I could go into a lot of details of what bothered me, but let's focus on the main aspect, i.e. that you could see every scene coming from miles away - and I mean EVERY scene (e.g. the delayed response of Glen after reentry into the atmosphere, Glen insisting on the math prodigy to check the numbers (and noone else!), the math prodigy demonstrating her excellent qualities in the meeting room on the blackboard, the romance etc.

All these aspects that you mentioned are all pitch perfect: the subject matter, the performances, the editing, the period details, the direction - with one exception: the script, i.e. the plot line for the reasons given above. It is a typical, perfect mainstream Hollywood movie and I found it awfully boring, because not one single scene challenges you to think / reflect / doubt / consider / evaluate what you see - and that is imho what art should do. It is perfect as it is - a normal fast food meal which does not aspire to be haute cuisine. But if you as a consumer want more, you go and eat at a different place.

---

'Get yourself a real dog. Any dog under 50 lbs is a cat and cats are pointless' - Ron Swanson