There are a few critics* whose opinion I thoroughly respect, from Pauline Kael to Roger Ebert, and from Janet Maslin to Manohla Dargis. Dargis, in particular, consistently publishes well-versed, intelligent reviews that I may not always agree with, but always respect. This is why I'm quite concerned about her lackluster reaction to two projects that are pretty high up in my list: Steve Soderbergh's "Che" and Clint Eastwood's "Changeling."
On "Che":
Throughout the movie Mr. Soderbergh mixes the wild beauty of his landscapes with images of Che heroically engaged in battle, thoughtfully scribbling and reading, and tending to ailing peasants and soldiers. Che wins, Che loses, but Che remains the same in what plays like a procedural about a charismatic leader, impossible missions and the pleasures of work and camaraderie — “Ocean’s Eleven” with better cigars.
Nevertheless, she concludes:
I admire Mr. Soderbergh’s filmmaking more than his movie, but “Che” is the kind of bold choice that should be included in a festival that needs to shake things up if it is to remain relevant.
On "Changeling":
Alas, the selection of Mr. Eastwood’s “Changeling” is nothing if not predictable and was, I’m guessing, either selected out of loyalty to a revered auteur or because it will provide a red-carpet thrill for the donors of the Film Society of Lincoln Center, which presents the festival. This fall movie season certainly looks thin, which suggests that programming pickings were slim.
Most troubling, on Jolie:
But “Changeling,” embalmed by Ms. Jolie’s waxworks performance and a sepulchral production design, adds no luster to Mr. Eastwood’s reputation or the festival’s. It will doubtless earn Ms. Jolie another shot at an Oscar.
"Waxworks performance" Ouch! So, here we are. I'm by no means turned off to the two projects, and as it is often the case with me, mixed reviews make me that much more interested to see the final product.
Read the whole piece here.
*For the purposes of this post, I'm limiting my definition of critics to newspaper/magazine critics. But let me make this clear, nowadays I rely more and more on my fellow bloggers for film reviews and I imagine this will only increase with time.
Posts
13 comments:
The more I see and the more I read of Changeling the less impressed I become by the film. I mean, I am trying to wait until I've seen the entire film before I judge it (it's only fair), but, I've got to tell you, it's looking more and more like a "possible rental" than a "full price" film to me. I MIGHT see it for matinée price, but I'm definitely not paying $12 to see it.
I am curious about Che because I am a big del Toro fan, but it hasn't been one of those must see films for me.
Do you think your dislike of Jolie impacts the way you see the film? For me, it's more of a love/hate relationship with Eastwood than anything else. But we'll see.
Oh, I'm not a huge fan of Eastwood, either. I am like you -- I have a love/hate relationship with Eastwood.
I think Dargis actually summed up my problem with Jolie pretty well:
"For much of the film, Christine weeps and pleads, begging the police for help and fending off disbelievers. She clings to hope, the problem being that Ms. Jolie, whose off-screen role as Angelina Jolie is so much more vivid and all-consuming than the parts she now plays on screen, this one included, does not come across as a clinger or a whiner or a pleader or even much of a waterworks. Like Joan Crawford, Ms. Jolie seems capable now of only playing variations on herself..."
I don't think Jolie is a bad actress, but I think there is a fascination with her that hides the fact that she's not necessarily a good one. She lacks versatility, and she lives her life so out in the open (in fairness, some of that is beyond her control) that it has become hard to disassociate Jolie from the characters she plays. When I watch her films, for me it's just sort of like, "Oh, there's Angelina Jolie playing an assassin... oh, there's Angelina Jolie playing a widow... oh, there's Angelina Jolie playing a single mother... oh, there's Angelina Jolie playing a mental patient..."
I think Angelina Jolie the person is likable, and I certainly admire the humanitarian work she does, but as an actress? Well, as an actress she's just so unimpressive to me.
So I'm guessing that does have something to do with my hesitation about this film -- I'm just not wild about the people involved. I mean, I like John Malkovich, and I really am, despite all this ranting, open to seeing the film and giving it a chance, but nothing about it has me going, "This is going to be amazing." Not in the same way Milk is, or Revolutionary Road, or Nine, or Public Enemies.
I know you are focusing on print critics here for this post, and Manhola Dargis is the best of the bunch as far as I am concerned and her talent is a great part of the reason why I want to become a film critic even if my opinions and hers differ quite a bit some of the time, but I just wanted to say the funniest review [one that makes me a little sad too actually] I’ve read of Changeling comes from Ms. Karina Longworth at Spout, “we can’t figure out why Clint Eastwood made a cheap-looking Lifetime movie that eventually turns into an “And justice for all!” episode of SVU.” Now she’s known to be a grumpy snob, but her review is quite the read. She also moaned about Jolie and her crying and her performance, ugh. I love Clint, I love Jolie, so I am all for the film really, the sooner I see it, the better.
A New Yorker friend of mine was also not taken with Changeling, saying its basically just a repetition of the style Clint has become used to and its getting boring. However, he said Ms. Jolie is Oscar worthy, so it gives me a little hope. I’m still looking forward to it, but I am looking forward to “Che” more.
Ouch, ouch, ouch.
I have to admit, this fall is shaping up a little poorly in some ways, a little like two years ago. I guess they can't all be 2007 (which was helped by a couple of '06ers that were held back like The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford).
Dorothy, I'm afraid our most valued and revered Ms. Dargis isn't very far off the mark. I saw THE CHANGELING on Sunday morning at the Ziegfeld and I pretty much reached the same conclusions about Jolie's performance and the film in general. I gave it a bit more credit for its craftsmanship: the clothes, the period detail, the cars, the polished look of Tom Stern's cinematography and Mr.Eastwood's accomplished, if repetitious score.
My review is posed at:
wondersinthedark.wordpress.com
Shame though to hear about CHE, which is screening this evening (Tuesday) at teh Ziegfeld. Of course I don't have tickets for it, and will be attending the Broadway show of A TALE OF TWO CITIES. I think Craig Kennedy may have lucked out by not coming, although we missed his company, and would have loved to take him around the city.
I saw THE LAST COMMAND (1928; Von Sternberg) last night at the Walter Reade Theatre as part of the NYFF, and that was a great experience.
That's a bummer, sam. But I have to say, I'm not too surprised. I'm just curious about the opposite reactions from Cannes and so far in the U.S. I'll be reading your review closely. Thanks for sharing!
As to Von Sternberg, I've seen an embarrassing small number of his works. All starring Dietrich. I should really seek him out more. Will check the Criterion collection to see what they have.
Thanks for that wonderful response Dorothy!
My wife liked CHANGELING more than I did, so it may be a bit of the old "different strokes for different folks." I predict it will get fairly good reviews, as it was admittedly well-crafted and entertaining. It could have probed deeper than it did, especially in regards to the Jolie character, but she still was beautiful to look at, and her performance was satisfactory. You and K may well come up with a far different reaction to it.
Von Sterberg's Dietrich stuff is of course his most famous--THE SCARLET EXPRESS--is the one most celebrated, but stuff like THE LAST COMMAND and DOCKS OF NEW YORK are probably his best films. I also loved THE BLUE ANGEL of course.
And the presentation on Monday was amazing. They had three men on instuments an dvertical music columns on the side of the stage doing the live score. Th eprint was a bit washed but still very good, and the film holds its dramatic power.
My goodness, Sam. You just triggered a memory! I have seen "Docks of New York." Saw it in a college silent film class (along with "Greed" and other greats). Gosh, I have not thought of "Docks of New York" in a long time - definitely will re-visit soon.
Speaking of 1928 silent films, have you seen "The Crowd"? To this day, it remains my favorite film from that period. Of course, I certainly value Chaplin's output quite highly, but "The Crowd" completely enthralled me when I first saw it. All of the fundamentals of Hollywood story-telling are there. Not to mention the amazing visuals and the fantastic, unforgettable score.
But back to "Changeling." Do you agree with the Times commentary today that the film appeared to be a project made strictly to win Academy Awards? I thought that was a bit harsh, especially since Eastwood and Jolie already have Oscars.
Dorothy: I must confess to you that I am a FANATIC of THE CROWD. I loved it so so much, and it ranks with GREED as the best American film of that period along with the Chaplins, Keatons and SUNRISE. (and THE WIND with Lillian Gish) That opening long pan shot that runs bewteen highrises and settles on the desk in the office is one of the greatest sequences in all of cinema.
Please send me your mailing address to my e mail address (TheFountain26@aol.com) and I will send you copies ASAP of THE CROWD, DOCKS OF NEW YORK and THE LAST COMMAND. I'll just drop them in the mailbox.
I agree with you that the Times piece on CHANGELING is too harsh, even though there are some that feels Eastwood is always jockeying for Oscar attention. At this point though, it's all "we've been there, done that." CHANGELING will get well-deserved noms in some tech categories, with or without Eastwood's posterings.
Hi, guys!
Amy's back~
I've been sort of following the news closely, as close as I could anyway.. xD
Anyway, I remember I heard a rumor about Button, that had something to do with 'problems' with the studio, so I got worried about the film, which I've been wanting to watch since the first teaser~
Up until now, I haven't seen many Oscar performances that have made me go, "Oh! She's gonna get it," not even a nominated feeling I think.
I think WALL-E has got it for Best Animated Feature, as well as a shot for Best Sound, and possibly Original Screenplay.
Iron Man has got my vote for Special Effects, and nominations in the Best Sound, Film Editing and Sound Editing xD
Hellboy 2 will probably get a Makeup nod, Sound, and Sound Editing... while I'm incline to say that The Dark Knight would get Makeup and even a Supporting Actor for Heath. Even though, it was a long shot for me that Heath could win or even be nominated, I've changed my mind about it seeing no other performances yet...
Hehe... sorry for the technical posts, I've no chances to watch any of the films that are being buzzed...
Thanks for the generous offer, sam. You shall receive an email from me shortly!!!
Ooh, ooh, send me those, too, Sam, send me those, too!! (Wait, are you already? Haha...)
Have you seen The Shanghai Express, Dorothy? If you have, go ahead and read my review--if you haven't, read it... Promise it won't spoil much of anything for you, I don't think so, anyway (it's been a while since I wrote it). Turner Classic Movies shows that film periodically--that is where I saw it from. :-)
Post a Comment