Lots to discuss this week in the film world. 6 Degrees has picked up some interesting comments in the past week regarding the hit movie Wonder Woman and the star power of Tom Cruise, among other things. Here’s some of the highlights from our 6 Degrees Magazine.
Critics Corner: Reviews are in for…Rough Night with Scarlett Johansson. The verdict-no surprise is…it doesn’t look funny. My Cousin Rachel has received mixed reviews, but this adaptation from Daphne du Maurier’s novel is favorably reviewed in the post at thecriticalcritics.com site. Churchill is reviewed at the Movie Waffler site, and this film also has received mixed reviews, and although the lead (Brian Cox) is praised, they also conclude that the small screen would easily carry this production (I’m not the only one who has started using this small screen/large screen marker to review films!)
Interesting Reads: The Supreme Court case Loving v Virginia came up 50 years ago this month. One of the films from the sixties, “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?” dealt with an inter-racial couple. But we don’t seem to have moved very far in telling the story that was told with veterans Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn and Sidney Poitier. Fifty years later, we are still stuck in the time warp, and this piece from NPR in 6 Degrees Magazine talks about reasons why that has been the case.
Hollywood News: Avatar is the Number One film of all time in terms of Box Office Hits. There is no date set for the planned sequel, but since it’s made more money than any other film in history, there is no doubt there will be another one coming round the bend.
One of the more complex issues is Net Neutrality. There’s a good article on Indiewire.com entitled: “Netflix Cares about Net Neutrality Again, and Here’s Why You Should Too” that attempts to explain the complexity of the arguments for and against, and basically lets the audience know that Big Corporate entities in general are not on the side of the average consumer.
In our magazine, there’s also an interview from Daily Actor with Geoffrey Rush, a consummate character actor. Speaking as one who has seen more than her fair share of films, the character actors usually tend to be the most interesting ones that carry the big films, that share the most intimate dialogue and give us the biggest laughs and the truest tears. It’s the actors that we know by their faces, but probably not by their names. They are not huge stars, but they are hugely talented and almost always have the most interesting and complicated characters to play onscreen and onstage. Geoffrey Rush is one of these characters.
What’s Coming: Here’s a point of personal privilege for those enraged readers who found my assessment of Doctor Strange in comparison to the Wonder Woman character completely idiotic. This is from a site that thoroughly covers the comic book genre (Fittingly titled: “We Got this Covered”) “ For many, the involvement of Doctor Strange is one of the most intriguing things about the upcoming Avengers: Infinity War. After being brought to life in wonderful fashion by Benedict Cumberbatch in November, the hero has quickly become a firm fan-favorite, with audiences eager to see him on screen again.”
Ok, that was my small vindication after trodding on some vehemently PRO-Wonder Woman fan’s toes who didn’t agree with my assessment. But for all that feel, as I do, that Cumberbatch is the superior actor and the film he played in was the better of the two, you’ll be glad to know that Benedict’s role in the upcoming aforementioned Infinity times….whatever has been greatly expanded.
The controversy is usually simply one of taste. And perhaps, as I suggested, some men may prefer seeing the beautiful and scantily clad figure of Gal Gadot as she races to the rescue from the trenches of World War I. However, one unforeseen lapse on my part was the political implications that would make Wonder Woman a hotbed of controversy.
Here’s a quote from someone: “I think the Zionist/Israeli lobby are behind Wonder Woman’s success. Let’s not forget that the movie heroine is an Israeli citizen”….Well, where to begin. Films are not reviewed with the political implications that are suggested here. Films are reviewed, hopefully, in terms of craft. The film is a statement of the entire production’s input, including the Director, the Producer, the Studio, and the artists who create the characters and in these modern times, the Computer Graphics and the cinematography surrounding the story
We are not going there, meaning into the politically charged motivations for someone who has a certain mind-set. However, the film that has been reviewed is part of a series of long-standing support; a genre emerging in Hollywood known as the comic-book genre complete with Origin tales of super-heroes. Hollywood’s intent, let there be no mistake-is to make money and make more movies. That has been the intent of the studios since they were filming in the back lots in New Jersey and at Edison Studios before they hit the sunny streets of Hollywood, California (Reference: 6 Degrees of Film: The future of film in the global village).
But the auteurs, the directors, the actors and the producers are also creating art. Some people may scoff at the comic book genre, but we know that Shakespeare created art and he worked pulling his plots from lots of dog eared material that had been floating around for ages. My point is that art can be created from any source material, including a comic book. And art is, as beauty, in the eye of the beholder.
I believe that Ms. Gadot is a beautiful woman who has created a memorable character in the person of Wonder Woman. The myths and the artistic license may at some point create a film that can be truly seen as a work of art. I never particularly cared for the original “Star Wars”, which is heresy for a film critic. However, I thought The Empire Strikes Back was a darn good film. As I’ve written before, I’m waiting for some creative genius to take hold of the material found in comic book form and create something wholly other, a masterpiece that will make the entire industry stand on its head to see where this new form of artistic expression is coming. It may not be that far down the road!
Films have somehow become as political as the rest of our society, with folks on both sides seeing and reading events into the creation of the films that aren’t supposed to be there. I heard some other feedback this week also. Here’s one general comment: “Hollywood is a big, “incest-fest” anyway…the same ten actors and actresses get cast in every movie.” Now, this one I do agree with to a certain extent.
But again, being an old person, I remember a time when it seemed John Wayne or Jimmy Stewart or Clint Eastwood got cast in almost every film-certainly every Western film. So that critique has been around for a while. But the critics are always going to take issue with famous actors and their privileged lives.
To that point, I also thought Tom Cruise was a good actor, at one time. But he has certainly been lambasted recently, especially with the awful reviews coming in for The Mummy (which somehow has managed to make money regardless of the bad reviews.) This comment comes from a harsh critic of Mr. Cruise: “It’s been 15 years since he’s been relevant!” Cruel. I think that there’s a ring of truth, but nevertheless, that was a cruel comment.
So, we find that the harshest critics, as with restaurant and hotel reviews of late, come from the movie fans simply reading the articles and agreeing and disagreeing, as is their wont. Keep up the good work, movie fans, and know that it gives us something to write about! I’ll keep working to get it right and till next time, see you at the movies!-ML