Why is it past tense and not present tense?

Actually, it would be "I think it IS interesting," which would imply that they're reading or watching it right now, which isn't factual, right? So they're speaking of it in the past, because it was, indeed, in the past when they experienced it.

xiph said:

I've noticed a lot of people use past tense when they talk about a book they just read or a movie they just saw, so I must wonder: why is it "I thought it was interesting" rather than "I think it was interesting" (especially if they saw the movie just a few minutes ago and probably still hold the same opinion)?

Also, does that mean that we're supposed to talk about the details of the movie in past tense rather than in present tense?

Click to expand...

Because they're reflecting on what they thought while they were watching the film. If they have a different opinion which formed later, then they'd use the present tense: 'I thought it was tedious beyond belief but now I think that was intentional.'

For the details of the film, I think you can use either. So 'Do you remember the moment when the heroine fell out of the windon?' or 'You know when she falls out of the window and bounces off the roof?'

It seems to me either one could be true. It's been many years since I read "Godel, Escher, Bach" (not a novel, though it does contain some short fiction pieces), but I still think it's interesting.

girlyswot said:

Because they're reflecting on what they thought while they were watching the film. If they have a different opinion which formed later, then they'd use the present tense: 'I thought it was tedious beyond belief but now I think that was intentional.'
That must be about Frank Zappa's CD "Jazz from Hell."
</derail>

Click to expand...

They "thought" it was interesting at the time.

They may still "think" it is interesting now.