i realized that the whole bleeding heart "it's awfully hard for moviegoers" might not be the best argument ever. i feel that it still stands, but it should stand with addenda.
up in the air was enjoyable. super-enjoyable. it's just the fact that it's a "good" movie that makes me leery. how many "good" movies have i watched and actually enjoyed? i'd say, in the last few years, wholeheartedly, about one? half-heartedly maybe two? i really liked igby goes down. and i...don't approve of, but can't deny the affectiveness (not effectiveness, but affectiveness) of the deer hunters. and i did feel that the squid and the whale was good, though i wouldn't watch it again without a fight. same for the secret lives of dentists, mostly because i thought that the hot male dentist's acting was flipping phenomenal.
so we've got about four.
now, out of what list were these four generated? below is a partial example of things i don't like:
i know where i'm going--almost as gorgeous as it was irritating.
eternal sunshine of the spotless mind--dear god don't get me started.
scent of a woman--serious? i don't know. i just know it sucked, despite the philip seymour hoffman quotient.
punch drunk love--kind of liked it, but not enough to call it a good movie.
the human stain--walked out after about seven minutes. WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING?
broken flowers--the title says it all.
shopgirl--seriously? seriously?? "this is what happens when we buy a sad girl gloves. by steve martin."
some movie about a gay chinese girl doctor--cute and nothing else.
chariots of fire--oh my god. the best part is that someone considers that a classic.
a room with a view--ditto pretty much entirely.
kinky boots--whyyy, awesome dude from serenity? whyyy?
beauty and the beast (the cocteau version)--visually stunning. not much going on in the upper story.
the royal tennenbaums--hated it.
bottle shock--quite a pleasant movie...in hell.
so you see what up in the air is up against when it comes to my viewpoint. from classic to shlock-sic, i hate serious movies. if i were to apply this sort of criticism to all types of movies, i'd probably go insane with vitriol and bitterness. but i don't apply this sort of criticism, because in the case of the dragonball movie, or the wolfman, or transformers, it doesn't matter as much. films have plots so that they can effect us--change us into what they want us to be. genre films are hoping to have a possibly unscrupulous, but also relatively un-abusive effect: they want us to be easily frightened, easily amused, easily shocked, and we can become so without much soul-contortion (though the long-term effects of such effectation might bear looking at). serious films want to do something more: they want to change us permanently. and that's where i come back to the argument that if you want to do something important to your audience, you be freaking careful. you make your crap meaningful. don't stick us in the desert with nothing more than a lazy signifier or two to keep us warm at night and cool in the day.
that's all. consider yourself addended, up in the air.
oh, also cooley high and breaking away i thought were very good serious movies, i thought. i have to review cooley high at some point but i'm kind of dreading it, because i really liked it.
No comments:
Post a Comment