When Ken and I were in high school he worked at the old Uintah Theater in downtown Provo where he pretty much saw everything made in the late sixties and early seventies. One of his fave old movies was M*A*S*H, the iconic Robert Altman film. Anyhoo. He wanted to watch it again.
So here's the part where I interrupt with the following pertinent 411. Ken often wants to revisit old movies that he once loved. And in fact, he wants to revisit them with our grownup sons. He's sure they'll love (fill in the blank) as much as he did. Invariably the evening turns out to be disappointing. Turns out our kids don't think "The In-Laws" was that funny, that "The Three Musketeers" with Michael York was that thrilling, or "The Seven Percent Solution" with Alan Arkin was that clever. To them (and even to us) the movies look stagey, dated--as though they'd been shot with a home movie camera in someone's overlit garage. The only exception has been "Butch Cassidy," which holds up remarkably well.
Anyway. We got M*A*S*H and attempted to watch it this weekend. Within 30 minutes even Ken was going "why did I ever love this movie?" It was all attitude and posturing with not much narrative arc and no one to really root for. Yet at the time it was groundbreaking and Altman went on to have a brilliant, quirky career and my husband loved that movie with all his rebellious hippie adolescent heart.
Which broke last night because another movie failed to live up to his expectations.
Which brings me to this point. Is it ever a good idea to revisit a movie (or even a book) you once adored? Would you mind providing me with titles that disappointed? Or that didn't? I'm interested.