Films that have no plot or purpose at all.
 

I was talking to some friends, as well as reading different messages on various internet message boards, and I have had many people tell me, and I've read many people post, about films that they hated because they "didn't have a plot or purpose". Now obviously that is such a moronic statement, but I'm sure you all hear that same thing.

A few recent films that I've heard people say this about are Lost in Translation, Napoleon Dynamite, and Garden State. When people say that about such films, how do you guys respond to it...if at all? What other films do you hear people say this same thing about?

I cant think of too many other statements that irk me as much as this one, when talking about film.

One that comes to mind is Robin Williams in Toy's- What were they thinking??

I can think of a statement that irks me more: it isn't realistic.

Well I hate it when someone defends a film by saying that it's just a popcorn movie! or you're supposed to turn your brain off!. Granted, there are films that work for that purpose, but many will apply it to every movie in existence as opposed to explaining what exactly was enjoyable about said film.

Boondock Saints

If one just watched FOTR and not TTT or ROTK, you'd think it was one long chase scene. :p

I'm guilty of this. I admit it. Said it right after watching Mulholland Dr.

I just don't get it. :hscratch:

Kids didnt realy have a plot

I thought films that have no plot or purpose are justified by being called "character studies."

the big lebowski.


all the dude wanted, was his rug back.


these are some of my favorite movies, btw.

One movie I recently watched that I think actually deserves this criticism is Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen. I know it's aimed at older kids/early teens, but that doesn't excuse the fact there is no direction to this movie. It just seems like a random serious of events in her life, without any real chracter arc or continuity to the events. The whole time I kept thinking, "What the hell is the point of this?" They could have shuffled most of the scenes around and it would have made just as much sense.

Ghost World. I guess I just didn't "get it."

I usually like films that other people call plotless, and meaningless.

With that being said, I thought Coffee and Cigarettes, was a major waste of my time, and I really saw no value in watching it.

Farenheit 9/11 -wink-

The Station Agent - but I really liked it.

I <3 huckabees.

I really didn't see the point and I was left bored through it all.

Agreed! Things that could've been plot points (if there really WAS a plot) are dropped without explanation. That film was the disappointment of the year for me; I was so excited to see it, too.

:( Nah just kidding. I understand. My love for this movie is actually just pure entertainment value. I don't really hold it in any higher regard.

Although I did enjoy the movie, I didnt think there was much of a plot to The Passion of the Christ. Granted, I think there was purpose to it, just not really a plot. Which asks another question, can a movie have purpose without a really having plot, or have a plot but really not have a purpose?

According to dictionary.com, a plot is: "The pattern of events or main story in a narrative or drama." So really, most movies, even ones you would call character studies, have a plot. If you wanted to find a film without a plot, you might be able to point to something like Andy Warhol's Empire, but even then you could argue that the passage of time constitutes a plot.

That being said, there are films that lack direction or coherence. Some do that on purpose, others because the people involved weren't talented or intelligent enough to realize their film was lacking one or both of these things. And sometimes it's because the studio carves it up before release, a la Once Upon A Time In America or Until The End of the World.

^ indeed.

I'm actually shocked by most of the responses to this thread. I am of the belief that any film has a plot, no matter how obvious or how small. It can be anything as major as a group of interesting characters on a quest to destroy a ring...or as simple as a young man returning home, coming to some sort of self realization.

There is a huge difference between a film with a lack direction or coherence and a flat out lack of a plot.

Which is just what I said. ;)

Yes, I was simply referencing what you had just said by typing it out in the same words, as I agree with you.

I think you just answered your question. You are taking those comments too literally, I think when people say that there wasn't a plot means there really wasn't a focus or a purpose to the movie. I for one enjoy a movie with a good plot whether that is a twisting convoluted epic or a simple story of one characters hurdle it just has to be good.

Purpose is a different story altogether. Did the characters (or the film itself) in the film accomplish something? One of the reasons why I didn't like Counte of Monte Cristo so much was because the whole purpose of the movie, a story of the dangers of revenge, was totally demolished when he was able to take revenge without any consequenses. That and the new york pirate really irked me but that's a different thread altogether.

"Alien Ressurection"

A plot...sure

A point........ummm.....

Well, in a way it still is.

The first half of the movie is a dream/fantasy. The second half details the events that lead Betty(Naomi Watts) to kill herself.

Jennie searches for the guy she contracted AIDS from.

It's about a contrived plastic world that the increasingly alienated Enid(Thora Birch) withdraws from until by the end she decides to leave town/commit suicide.

Purpose: to get the redneck monkey out of the White House.

Do you think she actually commits suicide? I never got that from the comic, script, or movie. Unless you're saying that leaving the town is a symbol for suicide, but I don't see it that way.

I would have to agree with Lost in Translation ... no point, no real plot... I could go to the mall, follow someone around with a movie camera and probably get a better story...

The point was seeing two people connect on a level in four days that many others don't in whole lifetimes. The movie worked beautifully in this regard. The fact that it doesn't have a standard 3-act structure is to the film's benefit in keeping with the authenticity of its characters. Life doesn't always follow a linear progression of events and movie-style epiphanies.

Well it's intentionally left ambiguous and up for interpretation. You could say Enid just left town and started a new life but remember the bus was not real. It did not have a destination display, the line was out-of-service and Enid doesn't pay a cent when she boards it. She also states earlier in the film that she would kill herself were her father to get back together with Maxine(Teri Garr). Near the end they decide to move in together. Again, it's up to the viewer to decide.

What was the point of FEAR & LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS? I mean it's just 2 people doing drugs and bumping around Las Vegas and getting into crazy encounters. Loved every minute of it. Johnny Depp & Benicio Del Tero are gods. Terry Gilliam's at the top of his game. Great dialogue (due of course to Hunter S. Thompson). Great cameos. Great soundtrack. One of my favorite films of all time.

this is what's commonly referred to as, "episodic". wouldn't be surprised if the writer(s) have a television background.

it may not be your cup of tea, but Lost in Translation, a film whose content is expressed in a naturalistic form seen in the works of filmmakers like Wong Kar-wai, Michelangelo Antonioni, The Dardenne Brothers, John Cassavettes, etc, certainly has a "point" or "purpose" in revealing the truth of its characters. moreover, the "plot" of this film is structured on an emotional plane. Two characters are increasingly alienated and lonely, they discover this shared feeling of isolation in each other. their relationship develops as their emotional investment in each other grows while in moral conflict with their emotional responsibility to their wife and boyfriend. when they must inevitably part ways, they finally declare an acknowledgement that the other was able to "see" them in a way that no one else in their lives has done before. some might call that love.

you may have no interest in films that explore emotional terrain in a naturalistic fashion, and it's fine to say you don't like it or that it's not what you personally look for in film, music, or art. but to say that the film has no point or purpose only demonstrates a narrow-minded expectation of what a film is supposed to be, as well as, a degree of intellectual laziness on behalf of the viewer to be mindful of what's being communicated to them.

"Baby Geniuses" sort of, kind of had a plot, but the only purpose I could find was to invoke extreme hatred in the viewer (a hatred not even Michael Moore could cause in one of his films.)

Sorry, I really dislike 'that' film.

;)

In my mind, pretty much every film has a plot, even it is paper thin and contrived. Having a plot is as simple as having something happen in the story, with scenes that somehow, no matter how distantly, connect to one another. There are a few documentaries and short films ("Un Chien Andalou") that may be said to have no plot. That's my definition of course, not the official dictionary one which someone already posted.

But a 'point' is what the film is trying to do or the 'message' of the film, or the lesson it's trying to teach us. Some films, such as "Lost in Translation," tell us something about human nature, which, I think, all great films do. Of course I'm not saying I'm so smart that I always recognize some of the points in the more open-ended or ambiguous films (almost any film by Antonioni goes way over my head. I sort of enjoyed "Blow-Up" but I know I missed a lot of what it was trying to say.)

cygnet74...

Wow.