What to make of Denby-gate, a rather slight "movie news" occurrence which took place last weekend and which is promised to have lasting effects on the critical community as a whole? A conversation starter that segued into a lively debate between the control-obsessed media-makers and the critics that dare blow their load and review supplied product early, the issue at hand is a needful one, if not necessarily for the current example at hand. If you're unfamiliar with the event, then fifty years from now, how the hell will you be able to tell your grandchildren where you were when you first heard it? Who cares about the first man landing on the moon, the shooting of JFK, the swearing in of the first black American President, this Denby thing is real news, ya here. More so than Lebron James, this guy deserves to have had his Decision spelled with a capital D.
Rather than regurgitate the story, here are some brief articles that should bring you up to date. This, this, and this should do the trick.
Alright, have you read 'em? Interesting story being made to look more important than it really is, right? Look, by having The New Yorker publish his review, Denby was in the wrong. He attended the screening with the agreement that he stay quiet until December 13th (the date the embargo, that darn embargo that kept men up at night sweating and grief-stricken, is to be lifted; liken it to a date that will remain in infamy). As the ever articulate and always humble Tony Montana once said, all we have in this world are our balls and our word, and we'd be best advised to break neither.
The supposed flood of early reviews that were predicted by Scott Rudin to come out as a result of the "crime" seems to not have taken place. If you go on Rotten Tomatoes and look up David Fincher's film, there is only one review present: Denby's. I know, I know, but Erik, that means more people are going to read his review and thus be influenced by his opinion, leaving the nice, abiding critics that respected the embargo date to have their words be seen as an also-ran. Meh, I don't buy it.
For what it's worth (and for Rudin, it ain't much), Denby's review of the film was a positive one. It's not on his top ten list for 2011 - oddly also released this week - but it's a favorable piece. His review makes me want to see the film.......more, less? Umm, about the same. The review has been so hyped, that when you finally get to reading it, it's a big letdown. Praise is praise, and when this much has been written about it, you expect something controversially groundbreaking. And yet, his is not much more than generically sound.
The reason Denby even saw the film early was because of the pushed up date of the New York Film Critics Circle awards. The group wanted to be the first of the season to hand out prizes to this year's sure-to-be Oscar contenders, and thus moved their awards-voting date to November 28th. There was just one problem: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo wouldn't be ready to be screened before the evening of that date. Whoops. The NYFCC then moved their voting date to the morning of November 29th to accommodate a November 28th evening screening of Fincher's film. I guess that means the movie doesn't take long to digest.
To be fair, Denby was against this early date of awards-giving. That's right, in a group of critics that wanted to be first on the scene, he protested the premature coronation. Awards magnet Stephen Daldry's Christmas release, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (a great title for a movie starring what appears to be a little boy and a not-quite-a-pedophile old man) wasn't even ready in time for the NYFCC to screen. Yes sir, they determined the best meal without even tasting all the main courses. Not much of the press has written about that though. If anyone's self-esteem should be hurt a little this week, it's Daldry's.
I suppose that means little now. Rudin has to realize though that no publicity is bad publicity. Imagine the new TV spots: "See the film that even critics couldn't wait to praise!" "We couldn't stop you from liking this movie even if we tried!" Sure would make the film seem more enticing to me.
If anything, this whole disaster has discouraged future critics from jumping the gun. This, I must admit, is disappointing. Have we already vanquished from our memories the late, great, fellow film critic of The New Yorker, Ms. Pauline Kael? Her review of Robert Altman's Nashville was legendary, in part because it was an early review of an early cut. That's right, the film wasn't even finished! And Kael reviewed it anyway! And the review was published! And the film turned out to be a big success! And you know what its lasting effect on film criticism was? A hill of beans! I don't know about you, but how often do you hear about specific reviews of Nashville anymore? And that's not to mention that perhaps Kael's most famous review, that of Last Tango in Paris, was published after she saw it at the New York Film Festival! Again, with scenes that weren't even in the final cut! And that review is frequently cited as one of her crowning achievements. Holy crow. The studios couldn't stop her!
Would a negative review from Denby have made its publishing inexcusable? No, but it would have been viewed as being in bad taste. The fact that it turned out to be positive makes this whole thing rather silly. I realize that Rudin can't argue "no one breaks the embargo unless they have something good to say about my film," but he shouldn't act like it's a bigger issue than it is. It would be hilarious if, when December 13th comes around, the film gets panned by every major critic on the planet and thus the marketing team is forced to use Denby's praise as a blurb for their ads. At the end of the day, does the dog wag its tail or does the tail wag the dog?
An interesting side note that not many people have picked up on: in the magazine, Denby's Dragon Tattoo review is proceeded by his review of The Adventures of Tintin, another film that doesn't get released stateside until December 21st. That film, one which has already been released overseas, does not have an American review embargo date. I guess the producers feel that if one country gets it, the word of mouth, positive or negative, will spread like wildfire via the internet, and that there's nothing they can do to contain it. But here is Denby, getting his word out early for all American readers to be persuaded by. Oh, the inhumanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment