The explanations to follow are based on A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Quirk et al, 1985.
Those two verb forms are modal, the first being the present of the verbal (modal) auxiliary "will" and the second the past form of the same auxiliary. No notion of futurity is implied in these two sentences.
It is true, or let's say, rather, evident to most, that the notion of futurity can be found in the modal use of "will" and this is so in more than one way; for instance, in the common FUTURE predictive sense of "will" a sentence such as
- "You won't feel better after you take this medicine, it is not good enough."
involves the idea of a future happening.
But this is not so in the OP's sentences. In those sentences the auxiliary introduces the modal nuance of VOLITION.
In the very words of Quirk et al (§ 4.57),
- "[…] three different subsenses may be distinguished. The volitional range of will extends from the'weak volition'of WILLINGNESS to the 'strong volition' of INSISTENCE. Between these two, there is the more usual volitional sense of INTENTION, which often combines with a sense of prediction […]."
This is directly furthered in the same section by the following.
(bl) INTENTION
- I'll write as soon as I can.
- We won't stay longer than two hours.
- The manager said he would phone me after lunch.
(b2) WILLINGNESS
- Will/ Would you help me to address these letters?
- I'll do it, if you like.
This meaning is common in requests and offers. […]
(b3) INSISTENCE
- If you 'will go out without your overcoat, what can you expect?
- She 'would keep interrupting me.
This somewhat rare use implies wilfulness on the part of the subject
referent. The auxiliary is always stressed, and cannot be contracted to
'll or 'd. In this case, the past form would expresses past time, rather
than tentativeness or politeness.
It can be seen from the above that "insistence" (b3) is the modal notion imparted, in both sentences, and that moreover, this insistence (on not wanting to listen), has nothing to do with the future in the first case (a state present in fact: he has been insisting in his refusal not to listen, he will continue to do so now, and probably will go on doing so for some time to come), but does have something to do with the past in the second. Moreover, "won't" and "wouldn't" would have to be stressed (as I have no personal certitude on a would-be absolute necessity to stress those verbal forms I'd greatly appreciate the comments of readers who think themselves entitled to add more specific details or a categorical confirmation concerning that question).
It remains to explain the use of the past "wouldn't".
(CoGEL § 4.61) 'Past time' in other constructions
Outside indirect speech contexts, the behaviour of the past tense modal forms is less predictable. Could and would act as the 'past time' equivalents of can and will;
[…].
(a) CAN - COULD
- There were no rules: we could do just what we wanted.
[= permission]
- In those days, a transatlantic voyage could be dangerous.
[= possibility]
- Few of the tourists could speak English. [= ability]
(b) WILL - WOULD
- Later, he would learn his error. [= prediction; […]
- The old lady would sit in front of the television continuously.
[= habitual prediction; […]]
- We tried to borrow a boat, but no one would lend us one.
[ = willingness]
- He 'would leave the house in a muddle. [= insistence]
The time reference is the past ("I was trying to talk to him"), therefore the past "wouldn't".
Supplement aiming at situating the modality highlighted above within a wider scheme of modal senses
Akin to this notion of insistence to which it is pointed above, the following additional notion of modality remarked upon in a note to the above section from Quirk et al appears to be a complement to keep in mind.
Note
[a] The predictive meaning of will is sometimes weakened, so that it resembles the ability meaning of can:
- That's a fine car. How fast will it go?
- The new grand stand will hold ten thousand spectators.
The negative of this 'potentiality' sense of will seems to have something of the personificatory force of 'refusal' (ie the negation of willingness):
- It's a good piano, but it just won't stay in tune.
- I tried to open the door, but the key wvouldn't turn.
It is almost as if the piano or the key had a will of its own.
