At the Movies – Drinking the Kool-Aid

– By Noah Gittell –

It’s happened to all of us. We go to a movie with high expectations. The films’ been widely praised by critics, the marketing campaign has whetted our appetite, and there’s even been some good word of mouth. We sit in your seat in giddy anticipation, but soon after the lights go down ... something is not right. The movie is just not that good.

But you convince yourself otherwise, because you have already conceived this one as a Good Movie and it is hard to go out on a limb and be the one person who didn’t like it. Or maybe we just want every movie to be good and worth our time. Maybe we don’t want to admit that we just wasted $11 and two hours.

For whatever reason, it happens time and time again. Everyone tells us how good a bad film is and, by our own hand, we drink the Kool-Aid. For example:

“Fracture” (2007)

Still in theaters, this Anthony Hopkins-Ryan Gosling legal thriller seemed like a slam-dunk, with two actors of different generations at the top of their games. The reviews only confirmed it. Variety called it “an absorbing legal thriller.” The Chicago Sun-Times described it as “smart, fast-paced and intriguing.” Scott Foundas of the Village Voice had rave reviews for the young Gosling, comparing him to Brando at the time of “A Streetcar Named Desire”, or Nicholson in “Five Easy Pieces.” The critics are the ones serving the Kool-Aid.

Gosling’s performance is a severe letdown following his affecting and promising turn in last year’s “Half-Nelson.” A young deputy D.A. who holds on to his last case (prosecuting wife-murderer Anthony Hopkins) before leaving public office to make loads of money and get rich criminals off at a private firm. Gosling’s Willy Beachem could have been a rich, complex character at the crossroads of life, but Gosling’s lazy instincts and a script that has his character immediately fall into bed with his new female supervisor give him no chance for complexity.

There was a pervasive silence in the theater in which I saw “Fracture,” but not the kind in which everyone is on the edge of their seat, afraid to miss a word. Instead, it was a bored nothingness, punctuated only by an occasional laugh at one of Hopkins’ line-readings that echoed his most original character, Hannibal Lecter. One of the many problems in  “Fracture” is that his performance is just too close to Lecter, and while that movie and that character, rose immaculately from the story, this character is all that holds the movie together.

“Children of Men” (2006)

When a bad movie is universally praised, it usually possesses one element that draws attention, so that viewers don’t notice the inadequacy of the others. In “Children of Men,” it is the cinematography, mostly the three long tracking shots that supposedly add to the realism of the film.

Long, attention-drawing tracking shots are nothing new (see the opening of “Touch of Evil” for one of the first great ones), but what sets these apart is that all three shots contain action sequences. And while the sequences are technically impressive, what they really needed (and never got) was layered, realistic characters and a story that resonates. Of course, even if the film had these characteristics, they would have likely gone unnoticed, as the only effect that these shots really have is to leave viewers stunned, mouth agape, thinking, “That must have been really hard to shoot!”

“Titanic” (1997)

The most Oscars in Academy Award history. Biggest all-time worldwide gross. How did a soap opera on a ship garner such accolades? It all has to do with the ship itself. There is one glorious special effects sequence towards the beginning of the film in which we see the ship transformed from its present state of ruin to its beautiful past. We will also, of course, remember that image, from afar, of the ship half-sunk. And then there are Jack and Rose hanging on for dear life as the last of the ship burrows beneath the icy cold water. These scenes overwhelm us, making us forget the cartoon characters that are supposed to pass for real people and the unnecessary length of the film (well over three hours).

But when I walked out of the theater after seeing “Titanic” for the first time, I remember singing its praises, mostly to impress the girl I had gone with. I may have even falsely confessed to squeezing out a tear or two. And while the movie may have had great appeal for a certain majority of the population,  I wouldn’t be surprised to discover there were more than a few guys out there hiding their true distaste behind an imagined tear.

“Pulp Fiction” (1994)

If we published letters here at The Record, I’m sure the inclusion of Tarantino’s supposed masterpiece would generate a few. And it’s not that the Oscar-winning film is all that bad. It’s just not all it’s cracked up to be (No. 5 all-time on imdb.com), and we were all convinced otherwise by Tarantino’s bag of tricks. He played games with the chronology and gave us some snappy and, more importantly, original dialogue. And while he explores some interesting themes of the gangster genre, the legacy of “Pulp Fiction” will always be foot rubs, “honey bunny,” and tasty burgers. Not enough to earn Tarantino a spot in the pantheon of American filmmakers.

This is Noah Gittell’s last film column until after the 2008 Election. He is off to Iowa to work for the John Edwards Campaign.