Fanboys at the New Yorker?
A film critic friend wrote a couple of days ago to ask "who are Richard Brody and Ken Marks, and why are they sullying The New Yorker's critical reputation?
"I was reading the capsule movie reviews in the current issue (3/26) of the mag, and my eye happened to fall upon raves given to two of the worst films in current release: Norbit and Reno 911!: Miami. Brody describes Norbit as a 'raucous, vulgar comic extravaganza' and [seemingly] loved every moment of it. He concludes that Eddie Murphy is 'clearly having a great time, and it's infectious.' He's right about the infectious part, but more sober critics determined Norbit to be the kind of infection requiring cold compresses and heavy doses of antibiotics.
"More puzzling still is the review by Marks of Reno 911!, which most critics have judged to be a bad screen adaptation of a low-brow TV timewaster. Not so the exuberant Marks, who describes Reno 911! as 'frickin' hilarious,' and determines that 'laughs this big don't come along often.'
"You may recall that Reno 911! opened cold, without advance critical screenings. This could well be the first New Yorker rave for a one-star movie that even the studio didn't believe in.
"These two reviews raise the following questions: (1) Has The New Yorker ceased being a high-brow publication and ceded part of its movie coverage to slobbering fanboys?; (2) How did the phrase 'frickin' hilarious' happen to make it past the mag's legendary editors?; )3) Should not Richard Brody and Ken Marks get out more often, if they are so easily impressed by movies like these? Perhaps if they were exposed to movies of the kind reviewed by regular New Yorker critics Anthony Lane and David Denby, they might develop higher standards."
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on March 24, 2007 at 6:04 PM
comment #1
JD
says ...
What's with the constant, incoherent belittling of fanboys? I know plenty of people that would qualify and none of them liked (or even saw) Norbit. I guess this is just the latest way for disgruntled old fogeys to articulate their envy of youth.
Posted by JD
at March 24, 2007 6:48 PM
comment #2
bellepoitrine
says ...
I often found Pauline Kael's reviews right up there in the pantheon of fanboy literature. She was a sucker for blood and guts and fetishized certain directors. Plus ca change, plus ca la meme fricking chose.
Posted by bellepoitrine
at March 24, 2007 7:07 PM
comment #3
James
says ...
As someone who has read the New Yorker religiously for over 12 years, I can say I raised my eyebrows when I read those capsule reviews a couple of weeks ago. But rather than question the New Yorker's taste (which anyone who reads anything else in the magazine must know is beyond reproach), I thought: "Huh... maybe these two movies weren't such turkeys after all." And I admired the New Yorker (once again) for not following the cultural criticism herd.
Part of being the New Yorker is not having anyone else dictate to them what is good, but maintaining their own standards no matter what others may say. Thus, when my taste doesn't jibe with the New Yorker's, I take it as an opportunity to question my taste, not as an opportunity to wonder if the New Yorker's standards are slipping.
Posted by James
at March 24, 2007 7:09 PM
comment #4
jeffmcm
says ...
Reno 911: Miami was a perfectly good little movie. If you liked the show, you'd like the film. If not, not.
Posted by jeffmcm
at March 24, 2007 7:26 PM
comment #5
Matthew Lucas
says ...
"Reno 911: Miami was a perfectly good little movie. If you liked the show, you'd like the film. If not, not."
I like the TV show...it's short, sweet, and features some of the most wicked humor anywhere on TV.
I hated the movie. It was bloated, stupid, and painfully unfunny. It should have stayed on the small screen where it belonged.
Posted by Matthew Lucas
at March 24, 2007 8:18 PM
comment #6
le corbeau
says ...
As I recall, Penelope Gilliatt first used the phrase "frickin' hilarious" to describe Our Hitler.
Posted by le corbeau
at March 24, 2007 8:54 PM
comment #7
jesse
says ...
Your complainer obviously hasn't seen the Reno 911 movie, describing it only in vague, and vaguely inaccurate, terms. Characterizing it as a "one-star" movie is a pretty cheesy oversimplification; I'd say most of its reviews hovered around the two-star range (indeed, Rotten Tomatoes backs me up, with an average rating of 5.1 from the cream-of-crop critics). I'm not even 100% sure that it opened completely cold, as there were some reviews well before opening weekend, and it was definitely featured on Ebert & Roeper. I think there were some limited and/or last-minute screenings for it.
It's also interesting that the cold/semi-cold opening is considered "proof" that the New Yorker liked a crappy movie -- not, say, the complainer's own opinion of the movie (either movie; I doubt he's seen Norbit either). Yes, movies that open without screenings tend to be crummy... but saying something is "probably" crummy for those reasons is, to me, far removed from saying that it undoubtably *is* crummy, and as such, should not be given any positive reviews from a respectable critic.
Finally, as jeffmcm points out above, Reno 911 was a funny little movie -- broad and uneven, but recommendable as a comedy. It's not exactly what I'd call a "turn in your film critic card" movie (not that I necessarily believe such movies exist). But the complainer says that maybe the capsule-writers should take hints for Anthony Lane -- and do what, write a haughty dismissal of Reno 911 that seems to mock the fact that it exists at all?
Posted by jesse
at March 24, 2007 10:14 PM
comment #8
wayne76
says ...
I've not seen Norbit or Reno, but I DO know that Denby can't write a single paragraph that doesn't completely spoil a movie.
Posted by wayne76
at March 25, 2007 7:31 AM
comment #9
nemo
says ...
"I often found Pauline Kael's reviews right up there in the pantheon of fanboy literature."
I was in college during the height of Kael's career at the New Yorker, and I made a beeline every week to the university library to read her new review. But I figured out that even though I loved her prose and her mind, she was not a reliable guide to whether a movie was really any good.
Posted by nemo
at March 25, 2007 12:48 PM