The Review that Almost Wasn'tOctober 26, 2004
In each of the past few years, I have seen about 200 movies theatrically (with another 100+ per annum on DVD). Of these, I typically review about 150. (Last year, it was 171.) However, although the 75% "review rate" might be considered aggressive, it points out that there are a number of movies that I see but do not write about. These are often films I see "on my own dime" - which is to say that I wait until after they arrive in theaters, then pay my own money to watch them. Sometimes, with these films, I decline to write a review unless the movie stirs something deep within me or has a shot at a Top 10 end-of-the-year position on my list. In those cases, I feel duty-bound to scribble a few paragraphs.
Several years ago, I saw My Big Fat Greek Wedding about a week after it opened. I immediately decided that I would not be writing a review. A couple of weeks later, when it became apparent that the picture was a phenomenon, I changed my mind. It's hard to maintain one's reputation when a review of the biggest surprise of the season is nowhere to be found. Unfortunately, I had forgotten chunks of the movie (it's pleasant, inoffensive, and unmemorable), so I had to accompany my then-girlfriend to a theater to see the film a second time before I could write the review. (I have subsequently seen My Big Fat Greek Wedding a third time, and can pretty much guarantee I will never again in this lifetime watch that movie. Once the Windex jokes cease to be funny, the production doesn't have much left to offer.)
Nearly two weeks ago, on a chilly Sunday afternoon, after watching the Philadelphia Eagles beat the Carolina Panthers, I trundled off to the local arthouse multiplex to watch Primer. The advance buzz was mixed, but I had skimmed over a few rave reviews, and the short description in the the Toronto Film Festival Program Guide made it sound almost delicious. I like low-budget science fiction. The lack of money forces the filmmakers to stretch their creativity. I adore fare like Pi and The Sticky Fingers of Time. But I did not adore Primer.
As I left the theater, disappointed by what I had just witnessed, I decided that there would be no review. The movie had been out for three days and I didn't feel properly motivated. Bad movies don't always leave a sour feeling, but bad movies I expect to be good, do. Eight days later, after perusing one positive review after another, I changed my mind. Someone had to present a dissenting opinion. Surely not everyone who had seen Primer was ready to genuflect at director Shane Carruth's altar. Fortunately, I remembered the film clearly enough that a second trip was unnecessary. Thus was born a review I never expected to write.
Although I believe that Primer is poorly made, I think Carruth deserves praise and credit for getting this thing into theaters. He didn't just think about making a movie; he did it. Carruth's Cinderella tale is a source of inspiration, and is actually more compelling than the one presented in the film. I don't begrudge those who like Primer, even though my opinion is that Carruth has substituted gimmicks, trickery, and sloppy dialogue for a legitimate story.
I guess the bottom line is that next time you think I have "missed" a movie, don't assume that I haven't seen it. (A large number of readers believe that if I haven't written about a film, I haven't seen it. This leads to advice that I might want to check out One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest or Rebel Without a Cause.) Oh, and if you're really desperate to see what I thought of something I didn't review, I'm not beyond taking a job on commission. :)
#1 with a Bullet
What does it mean to be #1? If that position is to be determined based on pure box office gross (unadjusted by inflation), it's Titanic. Based on tickets sold, it's Gone with the Wind. Based on critics' polls, it's Citizen Kane. And based on ...
The DVD release of Shortbus got me thinking about the growing body of films often referred to as "art-porn." These are "legitimate" titles featuring explicit sexual activity. For the most part, art-porn films do not star recognizable actors but ...
This isn't about the Bill Murray movie, but it uses the idea of the movie as a jumping-off point. The essence of Groundhog Day is simple: one day, lived over and over ad nauseum. With Groundhog Day, director Harold Ramis develops this premise to ...