June 12
Call of the Wild 3D
Youssou N'Dour: I Bring What I Love
June 16
June 19
Dead Snow
Whatever Works
June 24
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
June 26
Cheri
Fireflies in the Garden
July 1
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
July 3
The Girl from Monaco
I Hate Valentine's Day
July 10
July 15
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
July 17
July 24
All Good Things
The Answer Man
In the Loop
July 29
July 31
The Cove
August 7
When in Rome
August 14
A Perfect Getaway
District 9
The Goods: The Don Ready Story
Ponyo
Pool Boys
Spread
The Time Traveler's Wife
August 21
Five Minutes of Heaven
Goose on the Loose!
It Might Get Loud
World's Greatest Dad
August 28
The Boat that Rocked
September 4
Amreeka
Carriers
Citizen Game
Shanghai
September 9
September 11
The Red Canvas
Tyler Perrys: I Can Do It All Myself
September 17
The Burning Plain
September 18
Brand New Day
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
Jennifer's Body
Splice
September 25
October 2
A Serious Man
Toy Story/Toy Story 2
A friend who had heard and passed along some less-than-ecstatic reactions to Milk a while back wrote me last night to ask what I really meant when I wrote that "those who've been spreading the iffy stuff are, I have to conclude, by and large mean-spirited and overly demanding."

What I was trying to convey, I answered, is that anyone who would come out of this film and call it hagiography and a bronzed martyr construction and declare that there's no lump-in-the-throat at the end wouldn't necessarily be "wrong" but they would fit my definition of unfairly dismissive and would therefore be, in line with this, somewhat mean-spirited.
I mean this in the sense that Milk has a good and honest heart, it tries and largely succeeds at telling Harvey Milk's story the way it seems to have happened (to go by Rob Epstein's 1983 doc), and that while it's not a great film it's a very honorable one -- I gave it an 8.5 -- that has no flaws so glaring as to deserve being trashed.
I'm not saying the naysayers are wrong. I'm saying they don't seem to have much compassion for a very decently layered and fully considered and honest effort. They didn't 'let it in' because it didn't meet certain standards they they have, fine, but generally speaking Milk isn't, by any fair standard, a 'problem movie.'
My first idea way back when was that Van Sant might make something in the vein of Elephant and Last Days -- cal it Harvey Milk's Last Day -- that would forego conventional narrative, but his decision to go semi-conventional here works surprisingly well as far as it goes, in part because of the raw and naturalistic vibe contained in Harris Savides' photography, in part because of the performances, in part because it creates a late '70s spherical wholeness that's fairly easy to buy into.
It's not, I'll agree, quite as moving as the Oscar-wining doc -- watching and listening to the real people tell it, and particularly to get to know and love the real Harvey carries a special realism and organic chemistry that can't be duplicated by actors -- but what is? Gus shows the real Harvey at the very end, and this brief exposure to the kindness and generosity of spirit in his features made me melt.
The friend mentioned that some who were at the Castro screening tonight were mixed on it as well, and that In Contention's KrisTapley is somewhere in there, clearly. "Could this be a gay biopic that perhaps plays better for some bizarre reason to straight guys like you and Poland?," he asked. That's conceivable, I answered. Maybe. It's a topic for further review.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on October 29, 2008 at 8:23 AM
comment #1
Marcello
says ...
I love that you're challenging the integrity of anyone who might not like this movie. Mean spirited? It sounds to me like a defensive reaction on your part, since -- reading between the lines of your quick review -- you seem to know that the film isn't anything special, but feel compelled not to be regarding as cynical or "overly demanding" yourself. I'm confident that six months from now you'll be remembering the movie as a 6.5, not an 8.5. Which is fine.
Posted by Marcello
at October 29, 2008 9:08 AM
comment #2
Sean
says ...
I haven't seen the movie and have no dog in the hunt, but an analysis like
They didn't 'let it in' because it didn't meet certain standards they they have, fine, but generally speaking Milk isn't, by any fair standard, a 'problem movie.'
is basically the epitome of what Jeff provides. It's a somewhat dispassionate gadfly analysis that requires him to exercise both movie critic and movie business skills. Now, for it to be a valuable statement, he has to be right, and who knows, but it's a valuable kind of expert opinion.
Posted by Sean
at October 29, 2008 9:35 AM
comment #3
mtgilchrist
says ...
I agree with Marcello to the extent that suggesting that people not have expectations, or not expect "too much" from the film (which I haven't seen) is a bad way to champion its virtues. The movie's either good or it isn't, so this kind of post comes across more as giving a pass to your buddy's movie rather than an honest, singular assessment of the film's merits without regard to what other people are thinking or saying about it. Ultimately I recognize that this particular post may be irrelevant to your eventual review, but "this is what they think/ this is was I think": posturing does not qualify as film criticism since it's a reaction to a reaction, not the film itself. In other words, if someone said to you "High School Musical 3 or Transformers is pretty good if you are only looking for _______," you would take them apart for potentially peddling a less than sound work, so it undermines your credibility to write based on other colleagues or critics' points of view rather than just your own.
Posted by mtgilchrist
at October 29, 2008 11:03 AM
Post a comment