Both Anne Thompson and Todd McCarthy have given their responses to The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and the reception for this film is beginning to feel as curious as the film itself. McCarthy and Thompson both discuss what they felt was a “cold” aspect to the film, a label that seems to come up often from people who’ve seen it; you’ll get none of that from me. The coldness felt to me a necessary part of the experience – the Fincher part. You’d scarcely recognize this director’s style otherwise. But beyond that, the way folk art is almost creepy in its loneliness, this film displays. At any rate, here is McCarthy:
Still, for what is designed as a rich tapestry, the picture maintains a slightly remote feel. No matter the power of the image of an old but young-looking Benjamin, slumped over a piano and depressed about his fading memory and life; it is possible that the picture might have been warmer and more emotionally accessible had it been shot on film. It has been argued that digital is a cold medium and celluloid a hot one and a case, however speculative, could be made that a story such as “Benjamin Button,” with its desired cumulative emotional impact, should be shot and screened on film to be fully realized. These are intangibles, but nor are they imaginary factors; what technology gives, it can also take away.
And Thompson:
Thus, while I admire the film’s amazing accomplishment–it’s hard to imagine that anyone but the digitally sophisticated Fincher, who has become adept at “painting” his digital canvases, could have pulled this off–the movie is not entirely satisfying. But given what it is, it’s hard to imagine it being done done any better. The actors are superb, especially Pitt and Cate Blanchett, who should earn Oscar noms. What’s missing has partly to do with the limitations of the technology.
No Response for "Variety on Benjamin Button"
All of Fincher’s films feel a little bit cold. That’s why the Academy consistently rejects Fincher’s films. This one is too big and accomplished for the Academy to ignore it for nominations – but it will perhaps clean up on technical awards and get snubbed on the big awards. The academy generally values heart over technical accomplishment. It will be interesting to see how critics influence the awards season because there is still no clear cut frontrunner.
sasha, i must be honest, your lead-in to these reviews is a little misleading. after reading both reviews i think both were highly positive. Thompson calls it a masterpiece at one point and mccarthy wrote a few hundred words on how much he loved t and then ended with his few complaints. i think its safe to say that this picture is going to hit common folk, critics, and the industry(academy) very hard and in a positive way
I agree with Andrew’s post. I could see 5-6 technical nods and no biggies. Or I could see 11-12 noms.
This ‘cold’ sentiment that I’ve read about 3 or 4 times by now … and the same ‘coldness’ that people say is the reason why the Academy doesn’t nominate Fincher films … does this indicate how a big epic (with feeling), however flawed it may be (like an ‘Australia’) could slide in and not this?
I’m sure Sasha wouldn’t think so, at this point.
I genuinely hope I find this film as warm as it’s praisors say it is.
So basically this movie might divide people the way There Will Be Blood did last year. Not altogether surprising, although kind of funny that Sasha and the trade papers appear to be falling on opposite sides of it this year.
No, not like There Will Be Blood…this is different. If you read the Variety reviews both praise it but mention the “odd detachment” thing. Emotion is a tricky thing – anyway, most felt detached from the past two BP winners too. And everyone moaned about both films’ endings.
Sheesh, I must be an android because I didn’t find the film the least bit remote, neither “technologically” nor in any other way. And I’m not a big fan of shooting digital.
I noticed the “BB” reviews at Pop Culture and Spoutblog ,also, mentioned the remoteness factor
And the comments below from Tapley ,also, talk about a coldness,remotenss factor
“One of the odd reactions I took away from the film, however, was that the work felt strangely cold. I wasn’t sure whether I meant that in a good way or a bad way, and surely, people were crying their eyes out over this thing, so I might be in a minority.
I, also, noticed that Thompson mentioned that she felt it would resonate more if someone were OLD enough to have lost a loved one, so, maybe ‘age’ is a factor as to how ‘cold or warm’ it leaves you feeling.
I’m wondering if Brad Pitt will be eligible because he acts like for just about 1/2 the film, the other 1/2 is CGI.
I have heard everyone mention the remoteness factor except for you Sasha. I think the nature of the premise itself might contribute to the remoteness, can we actually relate to aging backwards.
Also does anybody know the MMPA rating for the film. If its R, it will be hard to recover the huge budget. Even though Pitt is a box-office draw across the globe, I don’t see this film doing very well overseas maybe except Europe.
Reading how so many people feel the film is “cold” or “detached” reminds me of the way people often describe “Days of Heaven.” Of course, that film had a reason for it (being told from the perspective of a child). Hopefully, it serves an important purpose in this film as well.
Both reviewers must have been affected by the buzz going into it, and the movie felt short of its huge expectations. This is what I’m guessing is what happened.
With the “coldness” that technology brings to a movie–I don’t buy it. A lot of movies that are tech heavy and even fantastical are successful in making the whole experience engaging and warm.
Must see TCCBB.
red_wine, Pitt is eligible, no doubt about it, but perhaps wouldn’t be thought of as credible, rather than ineligible, due to the amount of CGI and prosthetic work involved.
Also, red_wine, the film is PG-13 and looks, by the consumer advice attached to its PG-13 rating, to secure similar certificates worldwide, such as a 12A in the UK, where I live.
And perhaps coldness is precisely what this film needs. The Academy hasn’t been favoring epics of late as much as they used to. Maybe they will with this one…
Cold in this case seems seems a quality. This can avoid potential emotional excess in a movie like “Button” that deals with such touching subjects. After I read the script, and know about this coldness, my expectations are higher than usual.
I agree that the so-called “coldness” is part of the beauty of it. Films that have felt cold to me because of the technology used have been The Polar Express and Sky Captain. This film, because the actors are very real did not feel cold to me.
Also, I have to say that, though Fincher makes films like this anyway, it’s interesting to me that the audience might feel a touch of what Benjamin Button feels being pulled out of life in such a weird way – wonder why no one has yet picked up on that.
RichardA – I hate when critics fall into the expectations trap.
Films are either good or not. Fuck what the world outside the theatre thinks or says, if a film connects for you, step up to the mother fucking plate for it.
Or bash its skull in with that bat this side of DeNiro in THE UNTOUCHABLES, your discretion.
[...] Awards Daily covers the reviews from Variety and The Hollywood Reporter that question whether the film is too cold or distant. This is to be expected from David Fincher…could it be a problem? With MILK and SLUMDOG’S appeal…I say definitly yes. [...]
Atonement got positive reviews, yet many people felt it was lacking something. BB could have same effect, but on the basis of sheer effort it could be considered the one to beat.
Another film that many (including myself) found cold and distant was The Pianist. So, y’know.
Leave a reply