Showing posts with label black widow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label black widow. Show all posts

Sunday, July 18, 2021

Missing milestones

Earlier this week I watched my 5,900th movie ever -- and completely blew past it without even noticing.

This is very unlike me.

Every hundredth movie watched is not a milestone worth recognizing in a venue like this, unless you want your readers to start slapping you for your self-indulgence. But I certainly recognize it privately. In fact, I feel a little excitement as that benchmark approaches, wondering what title it will be. Once I hit the benchmark, I bold the text when I record that title in my Word document where I keep track of my viewings in chronological order. 

So it's very unlike me to get so far behind in my documentation that I don't even notice which movie is the landmark movie.

I don't think I'm particularly busy right now -- in fact, we've just entered into another "snap" five-day lockdown -- but for some reason I have gotten behind on recording my new viewings. I left off after my viewing from last Thursday (ten days ago), when, I now see, I had watched my 5,897th film (The Tomorrow War). I'd already watched five more movies by the time I got back to this Word document to record any of them.

So it was with a different kind of excitement that I discovered, in retrospect, that my 5,900th viewing was the long-delayed Black Widow.

I'm not saying it wouldn't have been Black Widow if I'd known that I'd seen 5,899 movies when I sat down to watch it. It was a planned second movie of the night after I went to an earlier critics screening of Gunpowder Milkshake on Monday night. 

But I usually prefer a movie like Gunpowder Milkshake to be a milestone movie; it's just more memorable. (For the great title, not for the quality of the movie.) At the same time, I am quite determined not to specifically steer my viewings toward a milestone viewing. That's not to say you can't make subconscious decisions that affect this outcome.

And the two movies I watched before Gunpowder Milkshake were both rewatches on Sunday, as you will remember I wrote about here. Would I have made one of those a new viewing if it might have lined up Gunpowder to be #5,900?

I like that it worked out that I didn't know, as it made the whole thing more organic. But this is the first time I can remember missing the milestone in, I don't know, thousands of viewings? I've been marking these milestones for close to 20 years now. So I don't expect this organic experience to happen again anytime soon.

And definitely not for my next milestone, which is a milestone worth writing about here: 6,000 movies. And a big milestone like this is also the only time I do steer myself toward a particular viewing, to celebrate the milestone, and just hope I'm in a convenient position in my life to work it out -- not on vacation or something, for example.

Having watched a few more movies since Black Widow, I now have 97 more movies to figure out what landmark #6,000 might be. At my current pace I estimate that might arrive in late November. 

Friday, March 6, 2020

James Bond has coronavirus

Apparently, James Bond doesn't think April is a very good time to die.

November would be much better.

As you've surely heard by now, the release of Daniel Craig's "last" James Bond movie (didn't we hear that two movies ago?) has been postponed due to COVID-19. No Time to Die was supposed to come out in April, but now Cary Fukunaga's film will debut in November instead.

Maybe that would have been a better time anyway -- more consistent with the last few Bond releases -- but the reasons for it make me uncomfortable. It threatens to set a bad precedent and to screw up our whole movie year.

What if every studio thinks it's not going to make enough money on its movie by releasing it during a coronavirus panic? It'll be a pretty shit summer movie season, then. (Even more shit than it already appears to be, I should say.)

I get that financial considerations must be, er, considered when you are talking about a movie that has cost the studio at least $200 million in terms of both budget and advertising. Whether those are the actual figures for No Time to Die or not, they represent a good estimate for movies of that calibre, probably even on the conservative side.

But I kind of feel like earnings are relative, right? A movie studio has a lot of money, so in this day and age, a flop will rarely bankrupt it. The most important function of a flop, in practical terms, seems to be to determine whether this type of a movie is a hit with audiences, worth making again in the future. The actual box office total should be graded on a curve, relative to other movies released at the same time, not held out as some kind of absolute.

Which would work if all the studios just went ahead with their current release schedule.

But that's not going to happen, because UA/Universal/MGM have already balked. They've already messed up the playing field.

Let's talk about No Time to Die in comparison to April's other big action movie, which so far has not been postponed: Black Widow. If both movies came out in April and made $50 million less domestically than we might have expected, we'd still have a good idea of their success related to each other. We'd still be able to write think pieces, for example, on whether we're stuck in our old-world obsessions with male action heroes, or whether we can get behind female action heroes just as easily.

Now, though, the whole equation has been thrown off. If Black Widow flops, we won't know if it's because of coronavirus, or because audiences don't like female action heroes, or just because Cate Shortland is a bad filmmaker (my vote is for the last one).

No Time to Die, though, could be exchanging the devil it knows for the devil it doesn't know. What if we are even more afraid of each others' germs in November than we are now?

I hope studios don't start cancelling the movie season. And it won't just be the tentpole movies that get moved, in theory. Every movie is judged by its own expected success, and a movie that needs to earn $10 million at the U.S. box office to be considered a winner may be just as concerned about recouping its production costs as the latest James Bond -- just as concerned about proving to investors they have invested their money correctly.

I don't know how it's all going to shake out, but I don't like it.

Meanwhile, people in Melbourne are buying up all the available toilet paper. Seriously.

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

Another shot for Shortland

We’re supposed to celebrate the news of a woman or minority being picked to helm a big studio project with big expectations at the box office. Instead, such news disturbed me this past week.

After first being shocked that Cate Shortland was even a candidate to direct Marvel’s first solo Black Widow movie, I was then even more shocked, and also dismayed, to learn she’d actually landed the job.

What’s wrong with Cate Shortland, Vance? And given that she’s an Australian director, shouldn’t you support her candidacy all the more?

I would if Shortland had not made one of the most reprehensible films I saw in 2017, Berlin Syndrome. I was sure it would be my lowest ranked film of the year until I saw the Sean Penn abomination The Last Face.

Berlin Syndrome is the type of movie that’s so misogynistic it could have only been directed by a man. And yet it was directed by a woman.

What makes it so disturbing is that it’s the story of an Australian woman (Teresa Palmer) who is traveling in Berlin when she goes home with a man she meets (Max Riemalt), and he proceeds to take her captive. That’s not the disturbing part. The disturbing part is that the woman demonstrates an inexcusably pathetic level of agency, failing to take numerous obvious opportunities to escape, even though it’s very clear from her hysterical emotional state that this is what she wants. In this state of captivity she then dresses up in lingerie and takes photos of herself in poses that are both tortured and seductive, from what I remember (though I’ve blocked some of it out).

That’s half of what’s disturbing. The other half is that the film does not take a negative stance toward her captor. If keeping her captive were not bad enough, he does some other things that are disgusting enough to forfeit all audience sympathy, including a scene where he slams her hand in a door, smashing her fingers and causing her to faint (at which point he carries her back inside, like a groom carrying a bride across the threshold). That scene is plenty sickening by itself. But then Shortland, for some reason, wants us to care about this man and his motivations in the world. She follows him during his daily life at work and interactions with co-workers, and even to go visit his father, who is dying of cancer. The camera stays with him as he processes the sadness of his father dying.

This “creeps are people too” perspective is bizarre and, I would argue, irresponsible. Shortland is not even trying to suggest that something fundamental about his past has turned him into a person who abuses and kidnaps women. That would at least be something. Instead, this guy appears to have a loving father who is dying of cancer, not some bastard who beat him and passed on his violent tendencies in the cycle of abuse. Just some normal good dad whose grieving son happens to be a deviant and practitioner of sexual violence.

The thing that left me aghast about the film is that it was received positively. Berlin Syndrome holds a thoroughly inexplicable 73 on Rotten Tomatoes and 70 on Metacritic. Could that many critics have been blinded by the good cinematography?

It would have been easy to write Cate Shortland off from this one bad movie. It’s the kind of bad movie that makes you doubt all the artist’s judgments, and feel comfortable making blanket statements that their artistic output is of little value.

But then the news broke that Shortland was being considered for the Black Widow gig, along with a few other women who seemed like eminently preferable options. One of these was Amma Assante (Belle, A United Kingdom), who would have been a great choice. Not because her films were more like a potential Black Widow movie than Shortland’s were, because they aren’t – though you could say the same for Patty Jenkins before she made Wonder Woman. It was simply because both movies she’d made that I’d seen were actually good, whereas Shortland’s wasn’t.

But Shortland had a disadvantage to Assante in this discussion. I was basing my assessment of her usefulness on only one film, rather than two. I thought I should see at least one other before delivering a final dismissal. Maybe that would show me what others saw in her.

So the other Shortland film that seems to be a calling card for her is called Lore, and it was available from the library. In fact, I didn’t even have to reserve it; I stumbled across it a few weeks back. So I guess I’m telling things slightly out of sequence. I picked up Lore out of a general interest in giving Shortland a second chance, and her appointment as director of Black Widow ensured that I’d watch it before it was due back. Which I did on Sunday night.

I wish I could say my opinion of Cate Shortland improved radically. It improved only slightly.

Lore at least does not have the same kind of female character agency issues as Berlin Syndrome. The title is the nickname of the film’s main character, Hannalore (Saskia Rosendahl), who is the oldest of five siblings essentially left orphaned when their Nazi parents are taken into custody after the death of Hitler. She has to lead her twin brothers, sister and infant brother on a journey throughout Allied occupied Germany to get to her grandmother’s house. And she does indeed take a lot on her shoulders, and takes it well enough. I mean, you can’t accuse her of shrinking from her responsibility or collapsing in hysterics and failing to escape from the man who holds her captive, anyway.

But this film is permeated with the strange sense of watching people you don’t like, not because they’re bad people in general but because they’re … well, they’re Nazis. Now granted, Lore is only 14 and she’s the oldest, so you can’t really say she or her siblings have adopted the values of the Third Reich in any meaningful way. But surprisingly few of the people we encounter in this movie, including her and her siblings, seem to regret their complicity with the philosophies of Adolf Hitler, and again it doesn’t seem to matter that much to Shortland. It’s her showing a violent kidnapper/rapist touchingly visit his cancer-stricken father all over again. Of course, Lore comes first in the chronology, so I guess it informs Berlin Syndrome.

I didn’t mind that the film was hard to watch in a metaphorical sense, as it includes things like ant-infested corpses and men slumped in chairs after they blew their own brains out. I did mind that the film was hard to watch in a literal, physical sense. It uses this oversaturated film stock in which the reds and greens stand out in a really woozy way. I won’t actually say I felt nauseous while watching it, because I have a strong stomach and I’m proud of that. But I think the colors in this film could make a person nauseous. If I thought that was Shortland’s intent, rather than a demonstration of her misguided aesthetic sensibility, I might applaud it. Instead, another demerit.

I don’t know what I expected from this movie, as any movie set in the closing days of World War II, from the perspective of the Germans, is going to be pretty bleak. But a good point of contrast is Oliver Hirschbiegel’s Downfall, which actually goes inside Hitler’s bunkers, and provides us with a snapshot of a bunch of different personality types and their perspectives on what they have been involved in. That film offers the shades of gray that this one does not. This one only involves shades of puky green and red.

What I just don’t, can’t understand is why Kevin Feige would have looked at these two films and thought “Here is our Black Widow director.” Shortland’s aesthetic choices are nothing like the ones she will be expected to adhere to in the MCU, with a lot of the camera lolling around at close range to its subjects in these overstylized compositions. And if you’re making a movie about a badass woman, it hardly seems right to have made a film in which the female character shows a curious lack of ingenuity and fritters away all her advantages. The title character of Lore is better than that, but she doesn’t feel like a powerful woman – she feels like a woman who does what she has to and doesn’t sufficiently divorce herself from a hateful ideology.

It did occur to me whether Shortland’s obvious affinity for all things German – both of these films are set in Germany, and Lore is entirely in German – played some role. Not that Natasha Romanoff, a.k.a. Black Widow, is German, mind you. Clearly, she’s of Russian heritage (which gets generally downplayed in these movies). But I can see it being somebody’s myopic idea of an equivalency. “Russian? German? Both enemies of the United States at one point. It’s all the same!”

The thing is, this is a win-win for Shortland. Because she will not be the primary auteur behind the film – that’s Feige if it’s anyone – she will inevitably take the credit for sitting in the director’s chair when the movie inevitably plays well. All she has to do is not screw it up and she’ll reap the benefits. And Feige and Disney don’t really allow you to screw it up – they axe you long before then. I guess her getting axed is the most I can hope for.

And why do I want Cate Shortland to get axed from the job she’s only just gotten?

Because I don’t think a person should get rewarded for putting a film like Berlin Syndrome into the world. I’ll forgive directors for making bad movies, but I’m slower to forgive them for making wrong ones.