(no subject)
I love reading the Netflix reviews of movies that I love.
I was reading some of the reviews of Atonement. I can understand someone giving it a 3 or a 4, just because they weren't down with the time period or whatever...but giving it the lowest rating of 1 seems so crazy.
The thing is...Atonement is probably going to win a LOT of awards and I think justifiably so.
To say it reminds me of Remains of the Day or Howard's End or The English Patient would be trite. All of that has been said before. But honestly, what's so bad with being similar to arguably three of the best films of the last 15 years?
There's a 5 minute tracking shot in Atonement, as there is in all of Joe Wright's movies, that NY critics are calling show-offy. Is that really a bad thing? Are they saying that obviously the director is of very high quality and he shouldn't be so much better than everyone else? Isn't that what show-offy means at heart? I don't know. And what is the point of Wright's tracking shots? They're not like the Cuaron tracking shot in Children of Men. All Wright is doing with his elaborate tracking shot (if you see it, imagine how hard it was to pull it off) is setting the scene. He uses it to develop the setting; to give us a sense of what it may have been like during the evacuation of Dunkirk. By nature, tracking shots are show-offy, whether it's the begining of Touch of Evil or if it's Buddy Holly walking down the stairs with his band in The Buddy Holly Story.
Joe Wright's career reminds me a lot of David Lean's early days. They both started off adapting the seminal British novels in a very successful manner (critically, financially and artistically) and look where it took Lean. Is there a Lawrence of Arabia in Wright? I think it would be fair to say that he could crank out a Doctor Zhivago at least in the next 10 or 20 years. Either way, I look forward to Wright's career.
I guess maybe the critics who are giving it poor marks don't know how to differentiate between the book and its adaptation, which is an awful malady to have as a critic. All critics should know that books...are books and films...are films. Whether they're not faithful is beyond the point. Is The Shining a bad movie for being unfaithful to its source material? Quite the contrary, it's a great movie because it cuts off all of the fat and silver-skin from King's novel. So does the third Harry Potter book. But I haven't been able to read all of Atonement, so I really wouldn't know.
One guy on netflix says that Hollywood is drinking a lot of Kool Aid and will probably nominate Atonement for best picture. I agree with him on the last part of that and I love his thinking. As if HE is the one getting it and everyone else who LOVES Atonement is blind. I bet he loves Tim Burton and Donnie Darko...except when I click on his ratings, he likes many of the same movies I love. So maybe there really is no accounting for taste.
Anyway...Wednesday night I saw and fell in love with Juno. I'd decided that it was my favorite movie of the year and after seeing Atonement, I think it still is...but my faith in Juno has been somewhat shaken. It's an incredible little movie, but Atonement is really great, too. So maybe I'll say Atonement, Juno and Once are duking it out for the top spot in my top 15 or 20 favorite movies of 2007.
Sorry No Country for Old Men. You've been bumped.
I was reading some of the reviews of Atonement. I can understand someone giving it a 3 or a 4, just because they weren't down with the time period or whatever...but giving it the lowest rating of 1 seems so crazy.
The thing is...Atonement is probably going to win a LOT of awards and I think justifiably so.
To say it reminds me of Remains of the Day or Howard's End or The English Patient would be trite. All of that has been said before. But honestly, what's so bad with being similar to arguably three of the best films of the last 15 years?
There's a 5 minute tracking shot in Atonement, as there is in all of Joe Wright's movies, that NY critics are calling show-offy. Is that really a bad thing? Are they saying that obviously the director is of very high quality and he shouldn't be so much better than everyone else? Isn't that what show-offy means at heart? I don't know. And what is the point of Wright's tracking shots? They're not like the Cuaron tracking shot in Children of Men. All Wright is doing with his elaborate tracking shot (if you see it, imagine how hard it was to pull it off) is setting the scene. He uses it to develop the setting; to give us a sense of what it may have been like during the evacuation of Dunkirk. By nature, tracking shots are show-offy, whether it's the begining of Touch of Evil or if it's Buddy Holly walking down the stairs with his band in The Buddy Holly Story.
Joe Wright's career reminds me a lot of David Lean's early days. They both started off adapting the seminal British novels in a very successful manner (critically, financially and artistically) and look where it took Lean. Is there a Lawrence of Arabia in Wright? I think it would be fair to say that he could crank out a Doctor Zhivago at least in the next 10 or 20 years. Either way, I look forward to Wright's career.
I guess maybe the critics who are giving it poor marks don't know how to differentiate between the book and its adaptation, which is an awful malady to have as a critic. All critics should know that books...are books and films...are films. Whether they're not faithful is beyond the point. Is The Shining a bad movie for being unfaithful to its source material? Quite the contrary, it's a great movie because it cuts off all of the fat and silver-skin from King's novel. So does the third Harry Potter book. But I haven't been able to read all of Atonement, so I really wouldn't know.
One guy on netflix says that Hollywood is drinking a lot of Kool Aid and will probably nominate Atonement for best picture. I agree with him on the last part of that and I love his thinking. As if HE is the one getting it and everyone else who LOVES Atonement is blind. I bet he loves Tim Burton and Donnie Darko...except when I click on his ratings, he likes many of the same movies I love. So maybe there really is no accounting for taste.
Anyway...Wednesday night I saw and fell in love with Juno. I'd decided that it was my favorite movie of the year and after seeing Atonement, I think it still is...but my faith in Juno has been somewhat shaken. It's an incredible little movie, but Atonement is really great, too. So maybe I'll say Atonement, Juno and Once are duking it out for the top spot in my top 15 or 20 favorite movies of 2007.
Sorry No Country for Old Men. You've been bumped.