Youth in Revolt
January 15
January 22
Drool
The Girl on the Train
In one of his most stinging pans, Variety's Todd McCarthy has shown himself to be no jellyfish when it comes to zapping Gabriele Muccino and Will Smith's Seven Pounds.
Calling the 12.19 Sony release "an endlessly sentimental fable" that "aims at the heart at the expense of the head," being "unguided by rationality and intellect," he says it's considerably "off-putting for its manifest manipulations, as well as its pretentiousness and self-importance."
He also bitch-slaps Smith for embracing his character's "saintlike status...in a way so convincing that it proves disturbing as an indication of how highly this or any momentarily anointed superstar may regard himself."
The film "offers either seductive emotional appeal or indigestible mawkishness, according to taste. Along the way, there are references to a fatal vehicular accident, suggestions of [Smith's character's] deceptiveness and inscrutable imagery of a jellyfish which, you may be sure, all factor crucially in the denouement.
"Whether one entirely rejects the project's high-minded game-playing or falls right into the filmmakers' quasi-spiritual trap and is thereby helplessly reduced to a jellyfish-like state at the end, it's impossible to claim that Muccino and Nieporte lack the courage of their convictions, or faith in the moral value of their contrived little sacrificial fable."
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on December 17, 2008 at 2:24 PM
comment #1
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
I take it Wells didn't like it, then, as he's posting a negative review...
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at December 17, 2008 2:56 PM
comment #2
Geoff
says ...
Oh yeah...that whole thing with the jellyfish.
Posted by Geoff
at December 17, 2008 3:11 PM
comment #3
Ray
says ...
Yeah, the film sucks.
http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/review-seven-pounds.php
Posted by Ray
at December 17, 2008 6:38 PM
comment #4
Daniel Tayag
says ...
I hated, hated, hated, hated this film. And the jellyfish? UGH, I think I threw up a little in my mouth.
Posted by Daniel Tayag
at December 17, 2008 6:39 PM
comment #5
Rod32303
says ...
If the movie sucks, it sucks, but I've about had it with these MOVIE CRITICS talking about the self-importance of film actors taking roles in their choice of film...as if the films are a real depiciton of the actor. If the performance sucks, share why you weren't moved, not some psychoanalysis of the damn ACTOR. And what profession is more self aggrandizing than a fucking MOVIE CRITIC???
Also, the obvious Wells contempt for Smith is played out. WE GET IT, JEFF. Jesus. First Roberts, who doesn't mince words or kiss ass, then Murphy for some fucking reason, now Smith who just seems like a decent enough fellow with no legendary asstronics to, I guess, show he has flair or depth. Whatever. I am sure the film is tripe, but I am about to secretly hope it makes a trillion bucks just to enrage the fucking haters.
Posted by Rod32303
at December 17, 2008 7:05 PM
comment #6
dobbsy
says ...
Dare I ask for something resembling consistency from our critical and film fan brethren?
Consider this my Christmas wish:
Could we have two simple rules:
1) Don't slag a film for conventionality if you have just praised a ploddingly conventional film to high heavens.
2) Don't slag a film for being pretentious if you've sung the praises of a dozen unbearably pretentious films in the past year or so.
I know consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, but WTF people, WTF....
Posted by dobbsy
at December 17, 2008 7:09 PM
comment #7
TVMCCA
says ...
Curious as to whether Smith and Muccino have any plans to remake Sidney Poitier's 1971 BROTHER JOHN--a contemporary Christ fable.
Posted by TVMCCA
at December 17, 2008 7:45 PM
comment #8
ZayTonday
says ...
Will Smith plays the roles that he wants people to associate his own personality with. He wants you to think that this is actually him. He rewrites his roles and movies to show him in the best possible light and as the reviewer mentions, as a saint.
The whole thing is really getting old.
Posted by ZayTonday
at December 17, 2008 8:51 PM
comment #9
EDouglasCS
says ...
And once again, Variety shits on the review embargoes the rest of us have to follow... probably DIGGed the review too because they know they're first and can do so. They really are a bunch of motherfuckers over there.
Posted by EDouglasCS
at December 17, 2008 9:10 PM
comment #10
deadre
says ...
that embargo is asinine. it just makes the public think the movie is a dog, which it may or may not be. I'm glad there are finally some reviews before friday and if it's a dog, then public be warned. Otherwise all will follow the holy Will...blindly.
Personally, fingers crossed it makes less than anticipated... ...
Posted by deadre
at December 17, 2008 9:58 PM
comment #11
Daniel Tayag
says ...
I agree that the embargo is such bullshit. The movie is all over the torrents in DVD quality right now and they still want the embargoes to go on?
Posted by Daniel Tayag
at December 18, 2008 12:23 AM
comment #12
dobbsy
says ...
EDouglasCS, et al: Hollywood Reporter reviewed the movie online yesterday as well as Variety. For the record, THR's review by Kirk Honeycutt was a thumb's up.
Posted by dobbsy
at December 18, 2008 1:15 PM
comment #13
televisiontears
says ...
I had absolutely zero desire to see another Muccino/Smith manipulative trash bag, but this review from Portland's weekly made me think this might be a great film to have a cheap laugh on cable in a year. One of the funniest reviews I've read in quite a while. WARNING: Extremely spoiler heavy!
http://wweek.com/editorial/3506/11989/
Posted by televisiontears
at December 18, 2008 1:58 PM
comment #14
dobbsy
says ...
From Anne Thompson's blog:
"Scott Foundas's pan broke the review embargo in The Village Voice, followed swiftly by Todd McCarthy, whose review is only slightly less devastating..."
EDouglasCS: please share your thoughts about the motherfuckers at the Village Voice.
Posted by dobbsy
at December 18, 2008 6:18 PM
comment #15
John Cocktosten
says ...
This movie is horrifically awful. Don't even download it. It's hard to know where to start. I guess I could just say that I can't possibly understand how you could read the script and think it's a good idea to make it. I mean, you'd have to be an idiot or posess oceans of hubris.
Posted by John Cocktosten
at December 18, 2008 11:28 PM
Post a comment