14 December, 2007 | Leave a Comment
Since Atonement has finally been released Stateside, I’d like to link to my review of it from when it opened here in October. Atonement got rave reviews in Britain, so much so that I hesitated to post my own review, a review that complimented the film’s strengths but considered it to be a big failure overall.
I predicted that the American critics would respond in the same glowing way that the British did and they have for the most part. The film has also received seven Golden Globe nominations. While most American reviews have been positive, reviews in the New York Times and the New Yorker have been much more critical and expressed views similar to mine. Thank heavens for that. The deep flaws in this film should be blindingly obvious to any seasoned film critic.
But then what do I know about film? Last weekend I watched Little Miss Sunshine, a film I’d never seen before, a film that was nominated for a Best Picture Academy Award and was the media darling for months. After watching this film, I was stunned. It was a cute little confection, but how any self-respecting film critic could give this film not just a positive but a glowing review is a mystery to me. The film features a paint-by-numbers plot filled with clichéd cardboard characters to the point that it made me cringe. I could have written something this bad in my sleep. [At least this review in Entertainment Weekly got it right.]
It seems that in the case of Atonement and Little Miss Sunshine, style won out over substance in the critical sweepstakes. Most critics didn’t bother to scratch beneath the surface. I’m wondering if most film critics are on crack? Shouldn’t storytelling (more specifically how a story is constructed) and character development matter? I guess not.
Anglofille said @ 12:06 pm | film |
