European Tribune

Friday Pop Culture Diversion: Movies

by Maryscott OConnor
Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 03:20:16 PM EST




Crossposted from MY LEFT WING





Having finally got around to seeing a film that definitely qualifies as one of the more under-seen (ergo under-appreciated) releases of last year, it occurred to me that we might be missing many cinematic gems solely because they were badly marketed -- which is often the case simply because of absurd political shifts at the studio level.





It is a little-known fact (little known outside Hollywood, that is) that many excellent films get swept under the marketing carpet simply because they were created or championed by people whose replacements at the studios where they were made want to dismiss everything having to do with their predecessors. It's shamefully adolescent behaviour -- but then, if shameful adolescent behaviour were outlawed in Hollywood, we'd still be listening to radio plays broadcast out of New York.

So, without further ado, my latest addition to the woefully long list of The Best Movies Nobody Saw:

3:10 to Yuma (2007)

Starring Christian Bale, Russell Crowe and

the only-getting-better-with-age Ben Foster

It's a remake, and I never saw the original. Maybe the title was a problem; ever notice how many movies with numbers in the title bomb?

Granted, it wasn't technically a "bomb" -- generally a film has to fail critically as well as commercially to warrant that label, and in the case of 3:10 to Yuma the critics almost universally recognised a new classic in this one.

As is far too often the case, 3:10 to Yuma's relative commercial failure resulted in its exclusion from most of the major awards nominations; doubly criminal, because it not only deserved such recognition, but would surely have garnered a wider audience had that recognition been bestowed. I would argue that 3:10 to Yuma is not only the best Western since Unforgiven -- to say nothing of being one of the best Westerns ever made -- but that it arguably rivals that film as the best Western made in the past 35 years.

I won't bother giving you a synopsis or going into detail regarding the acting, writing, direction, cinematography or set decoration; suffice to say the result in every single category imaginable surpasses most known standards of excellence.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In a twist on the scientific truism, for every great, critically lauded film that nobody saw there is usually a really shitty, critically lauded film that nobody saw. That's just one of the things that makes it so damned hard to sort through the cinematic wheat and chaff when it comes to that vast array of films that never see the box office light of day; Critics Can't Be Trusted.

After all, if you listened to the critics, you'd have rushed right out to see, say, The Savages, which sucked monkey balls.

Sure, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Laura Linney are great actors. Doesn't mean they can drag a shitty story into the pantheon of cinematic masterpieces -- though if you bought into the near-universal critical acclaim bestowed upon their performances in The Savages last year (and the attendant requisite acting nominations), you might have been among the seventeen people who actually saw it in a theatre -- and probably among the sixteen who demanded a refund on principle's sake.

More likely, you joined the people in a slightly larger group who added it to their Netflix queues and forced themselves to sit through two hours of the most saturnine, torpid, depressing and self-indulgent bullshit ever perpetrated upon a gullible, critic-credulous audience.

Yes, dear readers, I fall into the latter category. Count me, then, as one of many who likely watched the end credits in stunned, angry disbelief: "THIS DRECK made the critics sit up and say 'Bravo!'???"

The Savages sucked. Period. And no amount of thespian acrobatics from Hoffman or Linney could EVER have made it suck less, though bless them for trying. On the other hand, DAMN them for bothering in the first place.

So...

Which movies make your lists?




Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
Another couple of nominations to my List of Best Movies Nobody Saw:





~~~ In the Land of Women: Victim of mismarketing. They tried to sell it as a romantic fucking comedy, for chrissakes. It's not. But it IS a very good film.

~~~ Lions for Lambs: Don't let Tom Cruise's presence fool you -- this is a brilliant film.

And another  couple of additions to my List of Worst Critically Acclaimed Movies Nobody Saw (and why is this list always longer? Easy: More shitty movies get made overall):

~~~ Northfork: A 2003 piece of impenetrable shit.

~~~~ No Country for Old Men: Yeah, yeah. There Will Be Blood was robbed. And Javier Bardem was ass-kissed for no good reason WHATSOFUCKINGERVER.





If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution
by Maryscott OConnor (myleftwing@gmail.com) on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 03:22:53 PM EST
3:10 to Yuma

I saw it, and agree on your judgement.

Lions for Lambs

Saw that one, too, but I wasn't too impressed: it was like a one-act stageplay, the two soldiers' choice didn't make any sense to me, and Robert Redford's role was a bit too much like expected. Strangely enough, it was just Tom Cruise who surprised me positively by showing a new twist on Republoscum mindset.

No Country for Old Men

Saw that too (hm, maybe I'm watching too much Hollywood?). I don't know to this day what that film was about, but bad? And Bardem wasn't good? I can't follow there.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 04:31:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I tend to either love or hate a film.  

I hated No country for old men.  

There really aren't words to convey the depth of my disappointment in that movie.  For several days after I saw it I was obsessed with finding some avenue of recourse after having those hours stolen from me.  I called the people who'd been harping at me to see the film to tell them how much I hated it, and they were all like, "You know, now that I think of it, I didn't like it or understand it either..."  That just made things worse.  It would have been better if I'd missed something.  No, all I learned from this film is that a bunch of critics and intellectuals mistook being nihilistic for being something of quality. This is pretty common among teens and college-aged people and posers.  But I was even further depressed to find that so many otherwise discriminating people fell for that logic.  I think everyone must have subconsciously been struggling for an answer to the question "Why did I just spend several hours of my life watching that movie?" and unable to come up with an answer 1) they assumed there had to be a reason - they just could not think of it now.  It would strike them like a bolt of lightning one day, though.  Because God is just, right?  Or 2) they were obsessed with finding some avenue of recourse after having those hours stolen from them and therefore decided to tell everyone they knew that OMG they just HAVE to see the movie - I can't tell you why right now, just wait until you see it - in order to ensure everyone had the same amount of their lives stolen from them, thereby levelling the playing field.  

Here's a tip, if everyone says OMG you just HAVE to see a movie, but they can't tell you why ... run.  Don't look back.  RUN.

Also, don't ever recommend a movie only because someone whose opinion you value recommended it.  Maybe they only recommended it because someone whose opinion they value recommended it.  And maybe that person recommended it because , etc...  And maybe it was only ever originally recommended not on its merit, but because someone accepted a large sum of money from the Coen Brothers, who wanted to do some mass social experimentation and see how many people they could get to recommend the very worst movie ever made.  Thanks.


"This is nothing compared to how Putin rigged Eurovision."

by poemless on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 04:57:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Dude's shotgun with the paint-can sized silencer was more interesting than most movies all on its own. Also, Woody Harelson dies.

There was no point, but so what? How many narratives are found throughout movie history? nine? I had them all covered by the time I got to college.

Also beats this piece of sentimental pap that I watched last night, that's for sure.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 at 02:57:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Also, Tim Burton should have been sentenced to death for showing Danny Devito's bare ass in the movie I linked to. Since we still practice that barbaric act, why can't we use it on the right people?

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 at 03:00:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
by Maryscott OConnor (myleftwing@gmail.com) on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 at 02:33:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, I'm with you on sentimental pap.  

"This is nothing compared to how Putin rigged Eurovision."
by poemless on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 at 02:35:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, lots of people here like films, but I just can't be arsed until it's on the telly. And cos I'm too cheap to have cable a film has to be 20 years old before I see it.

I quite liked Star wars, was it popular ??

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 03:44:16 PM EST
That's an interesting point about marketing.  I don't think I generally choose the films I see based on marketing.  Usually there has to be something about it I know I will be interested in.  Netflix recommends, the subject matter, what is available at the library, friends and family recommends.  But I know a lot of people who go out and see the box office hits ... seemingly based only on the fact that ... they are box office hits.  As for American indie films, I think they're becoming worse than Hollywood - and that's quite an accomplishment.  Most of them are boring and pretentious.  Like, fiercely pretentious.  If I have to see a stupid film, it should at least do something for me on a visceral level.  I really am to the point that I'd rather see Batman or Sex and the City than pay money to witness people trying to validate their own incredibly sad and boring existence by making it into a movie.  At lease SATC is fun.  At least it's not like sitting in on someone else's depressing therapy sessions.  Don't even get me started on Juno.  

Mostly though, I watch foreign films and documentaries.  Hard to go wrong there.  There is hardly a glut of them, so the chance that they don't suck is pretty high.  Also, one usually learns something from watching these.

"This is nothing compared to how Putin rigged Eurovision."

by poemless on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 05:13:23 PM EST
If you're into foreign documentaries, I'll have to recommend West of the Tracks, a ten hours long documentary on an industrial Chinese town facing industrial decay.

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 05:18:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
"ten hours long documentary on an industrial Chinese town facing industrial decay"

Wow, I think I'll have to pass on that one...

"This is nothing compared to how Putin rigged Eurovision."

by poemless on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 05:38:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
First, it's very, very good ; secondly, it's in four parts so you don't have to watch it all in a row...It's still shorter than any TV series season.

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Sat Jul 19th, 2008 at 04:38:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm pretty good at commercials avoidance, so the only film marketing that really gets to me is trailers before other films I watch. (In fact, that led me to our-tastes-differ No Country For Old Men, that and Bardem.) I also have the tendency to NOT read film critiques for films that really interest me before watching, for fear of spoilers. After watching film, if I liked it (or hated it very much), I read the critiques to see what others saw in it, an exercise often resulting in cursing the film critic for being stupid/ignorant/pretentious...

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.
by DoDo on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 05:43:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I read the reviews.  But the key, for me, is to find a critic who has the same taste I do.  I was pretty fortunate to find one early on, Jonathan Rosenbaum.  Hm.  According to the wikipedia article he's a rather big deal.  Godard is a fan.  Had no idea.  Up until just recently, he did the reviews for our local paper.  It seems he's retired.  Hm.   Er, well, crap.  Now I'm out a film critic!  This sucks!   OMG what am I going to do?!  

"This is nothing compared to how Putin rigged Eurovision."
by poemless on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 at 06:02:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]