Slow Pace and Superlatives
Why is it that some critics (sneer) will only hail as "great" those films that will put some people to sleep? Not that I think (all) such movies are bad or even necessarily boring, but some people do. Take for example Lost in Translation or Mystic River - two great films right? I think so, but I'll be the first to admit that neither has anything close to a lightning-fast plot, and as a result, I know there are people who didn't enjoy either. Critics loved 'em, though; they ate 'em up. I did too - they're great films from the writing straight through the directing all the way to the acting. That's not the point.The point is this: when an amazing film comes out and its plot is a little more up-tempo, the critics yawn "average" or "mildly entertaining." Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, as I've said, is brilliant, period, but Rolling Stone gives it 3-1/2 stars out of five and our own dear Excrement awards it 2-1/2, and the word around the Net is that Eternal Sunshine is a B+ movie. However, no review I've read has actually found anything wrong with the film (except one that called it "self absorbed"). I just don't get it, maybe it's because I'm not a critic, but how can you not throw out the superlatives when talking about Eternal Sunshine?
posted by The AMT @ 2:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home