Open Forum Friday: Why is Sentimentality in Movies a Sin?

Posted by on September 14th, 2012   Filed under: Open Forum Friday

With the first trailer for Steven Spielberg’s upcoming film Lincoln being released yesterday, the reaction has been decidedly mixed thus far. We’re seeing many of the usual Spielberg criticisms starting to come out of the woodwork: He’s too sentimental. His movies are old-fashioned and full of cliches. He’s just making Oscar bait. While a lot of those things definitely apply to his last film, War Horse (and, in some ways, were appropriate for that film), I’m not entirely sure that Lincoln will follow the same formula. However, it also raises the question… why do people hate sentimentality in movies so much?

Google defines sentimentality as “excessive tenderness, sadness, or nostalgia.” Ironically, if you look around Hollywood lately, it feels like nostalgia is everywhere, and it’s not just Spielberg providing it. But I know that in most cases when people say sentimentality, they mean extracting emotion from a viewer in a manipulative way that is not earned. While I agree that a director can go too far in this regard, the fact remains that we do go to the movies to be moved and to have our emotions manipulated. You have to be willing to open yourself up to a certain extent. Part of me thinks that some moviegoers are too cynical nowadays and they just aren’t willing to give themselves up to the experience. However, I also think moviegoers are more savvy now, and a lot of old tricks don’t have the same effect that they used to. What do you think? Is there anything wrong with sentimentality in movies? Is Steven Spielberg stuck in an old way of thinking and unwilling to adapt? Why can’t people accept happy endings anymore? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.



  • Henrik

    There’s nothing wrong with sentimentality, but there’s something wrong with overt ANYTHING. Spielberg at his worst is not sentimental, he’s overtly sentimental, and it’s a little tiring.

  • Aside from maybe “Schindler’s List”, I don’t think any of Spielberg’s films have really gotten much of an emotional response from me, and I think that maybe he’s gone to that well too many times, so much that I knew people (and I think you mentioned the same sort of people when the film was out) that didn’t want to see “War Horse” when it came out, because they figured that the horse was just going to die and didn’t want to have to deal with that.

    You know what gets me every time? Fuckin’ “Marley and Me”. Every God damn time. And you know what? When I’m flipping through channels and I see that it’s on, I KNOW I don’t have to watch it, but I do anyway. Sure, the Owen Wilson/Ben Stiller tandem is a great comedy team, but the Owen Wilson/dog that played Marley combination is dramatic acting at it’s finest.

  • I think the word “sentimentality” is sometimes confused with “emotion”.
    I have not seen War Horse, but I haven’t had any problems with sentimentality in Spielberg movies. I’ve seen everything he did, multiple times, except for War Horse and Tintin, and if there’s a film of his that skews towards true sentimentality more than anything else it’s Always, and even that film still has much to recommend it.

    I think it’s just a cop out to blame Spielberg for sentimentality. He’s a director who operates on emotion. He’s old school and comes from a less cynical age when movies where supposed to move you and make you believe in the magic of film.
    Nowadays, where even the average movie-goer can tell you how effects are made, where the magic of filmmaking is disseminated and exposed in DVD extras, it’s easier to be cynical about the whole thing. (I love commentaries but I can respect Spielberg for refusing to do them).

    The most successful Hollywood directors of the modern age either do not operate on emotion or use it very sparely. Tarantino is a great example. The guy, an amazing director to be sure, made a career on brilliant revisionist cinema, but true emotions, especially tender/positive ones, are rare. And his deepest, most adult film, Jackie Brown, is largely ignored.
    Fincher specializes in cold, calculated movies, and when he dared pursue a film that operates on high emotion, the beautifully made Strange Case Of Benjamin Button, he got slammed by his fans for getting “soft”.

    So I would say Spielberg will not change at this point. Either you like seeing sunsets with a sweeping John Williams score in the background, or you don’t. As long as emotional filmmaking, even excessive one, is genuine and comes from the heart (i.e, not melodramatic), it’s fine by me. The rest is just a matter of taste.

  • Henrik

    If Spielberg doesn’t change at this point, it’s a shame, because he used to also do other things than sunsets and shit.

  • La Menthe

    I can’t take this question seriously. Sentimentality in itself is completely alright. It’s when Hollywood does it, it’s bad. I usually have no problem with sentimentality in independent films / art films – and that is because there is depth in them. Amelie, or PT Anderson’s Punch-Drunk love are perfect examples of this.

  • Bryan

    Spielberg gets a bad rap. In the past ten years he’s made Munich, Minority Report, War Of The Worlds, and Catch Me If You Can. VERY adult movies, with outside of the WOTW ending, almost had a noticeable absence of sentimentality. If internet bloggers get their boxers in a bunch by Spielberg trying to make them feel something outside of themselves, then fuck ‘em. I mean, how can you be a film fan and not be looking forward to seeing this movie? Blows my mind…

  • La Menthe

    What are you talking about Bryan, those films are full of sentimental scenes! That being said, he executes the sentimentality perfectly in Munich, one of his best films to date. The telephone scene with Bana is heartbreaking.

  • La Menthe

    @ Lior, great post! I was even gonna mention Benjamin Button myself — a film that i love really much.

  • devolutionary

    Almost welled up in the last 3rd of The Iron Giant the first few times I saw it. Still manages to express some great internal emotion in me and it’s an animated tale about a boy and giant robot!

  • Bryan

    @ La Menthe – Maybe I need a better working definition of “sentimentality”, but to me it means basically what Sean is talking about – uplifting endings, sunsets, nostalgia, slow-motion battle scenes, kid’s toys, cheesy Williams scores, etc. Like “schmaltzy”. Everything Greg would hate! The films I listed, to me, are wonderfully adult, dark, and nothing like War Horse, E.T., A.I., Always, etc…

    I am looking forward to Lincoln, but I’m bringing a box of tissue… :)

  • La Menthe

    To me sentimentality means the film’s attempt in either a small/large degree to provoke weepy or compassionate emotion towards characters or of events in the film. Sentimentality is one of many emotions that is used by the director in his film, and can be helped through devices (but doesn’t need to – and is, in my opinion – more pure without it), such as music and slow-motion. @Bryan

    When Bana in Munich, after having killed the murderer of his closest associate, talks to his daughter, who he hasn’t seen since birth, and cries during the conversation, I consider it a very sentimental scene. And a great one one at that too, since it isn’t overtaken by sappy music (this is what made the scene between Caine and Bane at the stairs in The Dark Knight Rises easily the best one in the film, and far superior to both of the actors’ previous scene, which was heavily overshadowed by Zimmer’s score).

  • Possum Hunter

    When I first saw the trailers for War Horse I decided to give it a miss, firstly because I’m not a huge fan of horse movies and secondly because it looked overly sentimental (and about a horse).

    I’ve been a huge fan of Spielberg’s since Jaws and the first Indy film but every now and then he makes a film that initially doesn’t seem to appeal to me usually for the sentimentality factor that oozes through the trailer but when I do get around to seeing it I usually really enjoy it (examples, Empire of the Sun, Color Purple and Always) and War Horse was no different.

    Having exhausted every other option at the local video store that week I rented War Horse and to my surprise loved it. The ending piled it on a bit thick but over all I felt Spielberg handled the sentimentality perfectly as he usually does. In fact if anything I’d say it’s one of his specialities – take ET for example.

    Unfortunately the trailer editors like to milk every drop of emotion from a film and it ends up appearing over saturated with tear jerking moments but a master like Spielberg knows how to balance those moments and get the most out of them so I won’t let the trailers influence my opinion of his films again.

    It is true though that less skilful directors do overuse sentimentality or misuse it in their films and it can have the opposite effect of what is intended but if used correctly I think it’s one of the most powerful tools a director has. If Hitchcock was the master of suspense I think it’s fair to say that Spielberg might be the master of sentimentality (but in a good way :)

  • I’m no scientist, but…

    I don’t think people necessarily hate sentimentality, it’s just the fact that the media often presents sentimentality as this Disneyland affair where everyone has a fairy tale ending, and despite being admirable, it just doesn’t represent how reality actually is. The reason certain people hate sentiment, is because to anyone who has endured harsh life experiences, it comes across as being superficial, condescending and ignorant of the hardships they’ve faced as people. For example, any person that has been put in the friend zone will absolutely cringe at sentimental movies that show the sensitive, shy person getting the girl. Why? because for most people like that, it doesn’t happen. I think the main problem with sentimentality is that it takes normal situations, and romanticizes them to an unrealistic degree.

  • David

    This isn’t a criticism I’ve ever agreed with in any film, at least that I can recall. It seems I have a much higher tolerance for sentimentality than the average movie critic, so I know that if that seems to be the only complaint they can muster I would probably enjoy it and should probably give it a shot.

    I guess I just don’t see the problem. Is it kind of artificial and manipulative? Sure, but so is the over the top nihilistic and gritty movies and shows that dominate our culture these days, often to critical acclaim.They can feel just as blatantly artificial in their attempts to elicit shock and awe. Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead are just extended games of russian roulette, there’s no nuance there, no deeper meaning, no true artistic message. Nobody’s coming away from game of thrones with a new perspective on life and deeper understanding of the human condition. They are simple emotion manipulators, no better than a roller coaster or drop tower. If something’s going to blatantly manipulate me, I’d at least like it to be going for pleasant emotions. Isn’t there enough shock and awe going on in real life right now? Apparently the masses do not agree with me on that one, though.

    Movies I like that critics thought were too sentimental:
    Christopher Robin
    Treasure Planet
    Bicentennial Man
    La La Land
    Dead Poets Society
    The Fall