The Wrestler, if you go by Rotten Tomatoes, is clocking in as one of the highest rated movies of the year at a whopping 97%. I am no critic but I dare say I agree with that assessment. However, and weirdly enough, there is always one surprise when it comes to critics. Just when you think you know what they’re going to do they go and do something different, which is perhaps why Kenneth Turan’s pan of The Wrestler done methed with my head. How does one person with such great taste go so woefully wrong? I never tell you not to listen to critics but with The Wrestler, you have to trust me on this one, don’t listen to that critic. We love you, Kenny, you know this is true. Our years of devotion have proved it.
The Wrestler, then, has a much lower Metacritic score than it might have had, what with all of those 100’s. Scroll down and OUCH, Turan’s lands with a 50 bringing the overall score to 79%. 97 versus 79. Weird, huh? The Wrestler is quite easily one of the best films of 2008 and will go down as such. The three critics who missed the boat this time (and will live to regret it in, oh I’d say about five years) are Turan, TIME’s Richard Corliss and Salon’s Stephanie Zachareck. I think, if I may give an opinion on this, that they are, as a famous archaeologist once said, “digging in the wrong place.” They’re looking for another movie and failing to see this one.
No Response for "What’s the Frequency, Kenneth?"
Fascinating. I cannot say a Kenneth Turan pan excites me, though Stephanie Zachareck is often more fun to read when she’s displeased than when she’s happy, even if I disagree with her.
Ultimately, I can’t wait to see the film.
The Wrestler is obviously earing strenght as days go by. Tomei has managed to stole a couple of awards from frontrunners Cruz and Davis – Oscar might be a different thing, though… The way I see the Oscar noms, it might end…
Locks:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Buttom
Slumdog Millionaire
And then: 1 of these Two
The Dark Knight
Wall – E
and 2 of these:
Frost/Nixon, The Wrestler, Milk, Doubt
I’m right now more inclined to say Buttom, Millionaire, Dark Knight, Wrestler and Nixon. But that changes every minute.
Milk won’t miss a BP nom…. Its locked with BB and SM.
I am a Ken Turan fan, though occasionally (like with Atonement) we disagree. All his dismissal of the film but praise for Mickey Roarke’s performance does amidst rave reviews from others is to peak my interest in seeing it.
“The Wrestler, then, has a much lower Metacritic score than it might have had, what with all of those 100′ds. Scroll down and OUCH, Turan’s lands with a 50 bringing the overall score to 79%.”
Stephanie Zacharek had the same draggin’ lady effect on The Dark Knight and WALL-E. She gave both movies their lowest scores — 50 for TDK and 70 for W-E, and took a big snarly bite out of their average.
It’s the stacks of prefect 100 scores that matter as an indicator for Best Picture nom. The Wrestler might be only at 79, while Granpa Torino is at 74 — But GT has no 100s at all. Nobody thinks it’s an A+ movie. They all agree it’s a decent solid B. The only thing keeping GT’s score high for now is that nobody seems willing to hammer it with a really low score (nobody except reckless hooligans like me.)
The Wrestler will be getting more than a dozen more reviews before its number settles — and time to collect more scores of 100 to raise its average. That rack of 100s is already demonstrating it has what it takes to go all the way: people feel passionately about it. Movies don’t make it to a BP nomination unless plenty of AMPAS voters mark it #1 on their ballot.
This is another reason why I think the IMDb scores I unpacked this morning are telling a parallel story to this one. An 8.9 IMDb score puts The Wrestler right behind TDK as the 2nd highest ranked movie of the year.
Love it when Sasha and I come at a movie from two different angles, and arrive at the same conclusion independently.
(A lot more fun than when we occasionally clash in a head-on collision and I’m vaporized. *poof!*)
Even if I disagree with you on several issues, you people seem to be as close as it gets to experts on the whole best-of-the-year awards thing. As such, I have an honest question for you: What’s with the critics’ apparently total lack of appreciation for “Revolutionary Road”?
I think it’s a fantastic, resonant film, very well-written and directed, with excelent production values and featuring some of the flat-out greatests performances of the year: Kate and Leo’s, and supporting Michael Shannon’s.
I’ve heard some theories that I don’t think really add up: that it’s too similar to Mendes’ own “American Beauty”, that after the showers of love for TV’s equally fantastic “Mad Men” critics don’t want to elevate another 50’s-set piece, or that it just doesn’t measure up to Yates’ almost mythical novel.
Personally, I think it’s just the producers’ own fault for setting such a late, late-year release date, and that’s why I believe not enough critics have acctually seen it. What do you think?
I wrote in a different comment yesterday about the ‘Turan Pan’ — It’s just a lousy argument he makes, as he claims ‘The Wrestler’ is “exploitative” and making the audience squirm for squirm’s sake — Wha!?
I think Aronofsky had no choice but to show the real, bloody, tough-as-nails extremely minor league wrestling circuit and all that goes with it so that when Rourke says that line to Tomei at the end, it resonates a little more soundly. I think that’ s why the movie work so well, personally.
Who would have been impressed by Rourke throwing a couple elbows and wedgies and then making the decision he did at the end?
Ryan, dude, you truly are one of the biggest motherfuckers I’ve ever met: not only did you bash the Reel Geezers for being “too old to even watch ‘The Dark Knight’”, but now you manage to out-asshol-ify yourself by suggesting that Stephanie Zacharek is “too woman-ly” to appreciate “The Wrestler”, “The Dark Knight” or even “WALL-E”?
And it’s all just because they don’t agree with your own opinions? Man, you’re pathetic. Seriously.
Carlos, why don’t you crawl down out of my ass.
What makes you think I was saying Zacharek didn’t like The Dark Knight and WALL-E because she’s female? Are you fucking insane? I made the “draggin’ lady” remark as a way of saying she’s dragging the average for those movies down. It’s a play on words with Dragon Lady.
I’m not poking at her because she disagrees with me. I’m poking at her because, in these two cases, she disagrees with nearly every other reputable critic. She finds herself at the very bottom of the rankings for the two best reviewed movies of the year. She’s at the extreme edge of the critical community in both cases — just as Kenneth Turan will find himself with The Wrestler. I’ll call her out on that if I feel like it, but it’s got nothing to do with her gender. Everybody here knows that Stephanie Zacherek is my favorite critic.
I’ll tell you this once, Carlos. We don’t call people “motherfuckers” on this site. We disagree and have verbal brawls, but there’s a limit to the level of nastiness allowed and you’re close to crossing it.
What’s with the critics’ apparently total lack of appreciation for “Revolutionary Road”?
Why is it the lack of appreciation “apparent” Carlos?
Revolutionary Road has a 90% positive rating on RT. It only has two negative reviews out of 21. While true it’s not earning a lot of #1 wins from the critics groups, it’s been appearing on plenty of prestigious Top 10 lists.
There can be only one Best Picture in the critics’ final tally. Failure to be chosen the very best by a dozen individuals is no indication that they hated Revolutionary Road. Just that most of them seem to like Slumdog Millionaire better.
The major critics have yet to weigh in. It’s way too soon to be spreading the myth that Revolutionary Road is not doing well with critics. Check out Rotten Tomatoes for proof.
“I think it’s just the producers’ own fault for setting such a late, late-year release date, and that’s why I believe not enough critics have acctually seen it. What do you think?”
I think that’s a flimsy argument. Critics get screener DVDs and are invited to private screenings so they can see the movies in ideal conditions. I’m a relative nobody, and it’s no problem for me to get a screener DVD.
Exactly, Ryan. I don’t like the film, but the critics certainly do.
Touched a nerve, didn’t I, LOL? I have to admit that I missinterpreted the tone of your comment. I recognized the wordplay, but I read it with an emphasis on ‘lady effect’ rather than ‘draggin’ lady’. Perhaps some quotes might have helped.
Now, you can’t say you’re totally innocent. The fact that you did actually say the Reel Geezers are just too old to even watch “TDK”, let alone appreciate it, still makes you a MF =D.
By the way, I said it before and I’ll say it again: I bet Sidney Lumet, Clint Eastwood and specially Manoel de Oliveira would not only disagree with that statement, they’d also feel offended by it.
I bet Sidney Lumet, Clint Eastwood and specially Manoel de Oliveira would not only disagree, but feel offended by such a thing.”
yeah, I’m really nervous about offending Clint Eastwood. If he makes too many more movies like Gran Torino, they’ll have to start sending him out with pretend cameras and empty film cartridges.
Sidney Lumet is probably more into advanced technology and cutting edge digital filmmaking than most directors half his age.
Again, Carlos, just because I do (sincerely) believe that some older people aren’t able to fully appreciate movies targeted at people 2 or 3 generations behind behind them, doesn’t mean I think all old people are clueless.
But when Lorenzo says he misses the old “innocent” Batman — the one who was politely law-abiding and let criminals get away if he couldn’t find a legal parking place — then I have to think he needs to adjust his perceptions beyond the kind of kitschy cartoon Batman he helped inflict on kids 40 years ago. His pudgy Batman was an insult to the original creators. If he can’t see that, then he’s living 4 decades in the past. That’s a problem only old people have. (But not all of them.)
Not to get too involved, but Ryan, Carlos…AIM would probably be best for your back and forth commenting (ahem arguing) shenanigans.
As for THE WRESTLER…I can’t wait to see it. I’m in the Orlando area and it won’t open until mid-January, but I can already tell that it is one I will enjoy, even if ironically I HATE wrestling in general. Hmm…I guess it will take a good film, like this one (of course I’m assuming that I’ll like it, but then again, it’s not exactly “Never Back Down” or something like that) to maybe not appreciate wrestling per se, but maybe take a look at the life of someone who makes a living out of it.
My only concern is that I’m hoping Mickey Rourke is not stealing Sean Penn’s spotlight for MILK, because IMHO Penn deserves the Oscar no questions asked…his portrayal of Milk is charming, provocative, daring and accurate and it would be a shame to not honor it.
Let’s make something clear: I disagree with their review of “The Dark Knight”, which is in fact one of the best films of the year. However, saying they’re just too old to appreciate it, or going as far as suggesting that they souldn’t even watch it because of their age, is disgustingly low and cheap.
Now, what you say about Mr. Eastwood is completely uncalled for. Moreover, I don’t understand how you dare to say that calling someone a MF here is off-limits, when saying those things is fair game. Fine, so “Gran Torino” is not that good. Still, the man made “Letters from Iwo Jima” and “Flags of Our Fathers” just two years ago.
“…just because I do (sincerely) believe that some older people aren’t able to fully appreciate movies targeted at people 2 or 3 generations behind behind them…”
See, that’s where your train goes completely off-track: you’re flat-out wrong. Great cinema is SOOOOOO not a question of “targets”.
As for “The Wrestler”, thank you Fidel, I’m not even one tiny bit surprised that it turned out to be the tour de force that it is. Ever since the trippy “Pi” and the dazzling and heartbreaking “Requiem for a Dream”, Darren Aronofsky has proven himself as one of the most talented filmmakers out there.
I still think “The Fountain” is an unappreciated and misunderstood gem.
well, when I saw it fell from 100 to 96% I naturally thought Armond White, but I was shocked to see Turan. Armond did come predictably.
Carlos and Ryan…..thanks for the FUN! I’m enjoying your catfight!
Let me say that you are most certainly welcome
.
Carlos Balbás-Espín,
I don’t think Ryan’s comment about (some) old people not being able to enjoy The Dark Knight in the same way as young people is a sign of ageism at all.
My 65 year old mother could not understand The Dark Knight very well. She didn’t understand Batman and his motivations very much, didn’t understand why the Joker behaved like he did and didn’t understand the style and purpose of the movie as a whole too well. Really, all she could identify with was the one female character, Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal). That was her connection to the movie.
I understand that my mother is ONE, unique example, but really what it revealed to me was that The Dark Knight was very much unlike any movie she had ever seen. She could not identify with the content the way that–yes–younger audiences could. She didn’t have the same “Batman” education we younger people have had (or understanding of Nolan’s desire to take the series in a ‘darker’ direction) and was therefore less able to appreciate the movie as a whole.
And if Ryan’s clever writing is a sign of his being a”MF” as you claim, all I have to say is this… keep being a MF Ryan!
LOL, now you’re just being antagonistic for the sake of it!
I saw “TDK” for the first time on a packed, Sunday afternoon theather. Next to me were sitting a couple of boys, who might have been about 12 years old, and their 60-something grandparents. By pic’s end, they were all ecstatic.
I’m sorry to be the one to say this, but what you said just means your mom is dumb xD!
I have lived in Los Angeles my entire life and I have been reading Kenneth Turan’s reviews since he came aboard to the LA Times in 1991. Let me say when he get’s it wrong, he really get’s it wrong. In the case of ‘The Wrestler’ he has really, truly got it wrong. To me…’The Wrestler is the best movie of the year. Mickey Rourke’s performance is what acting is all about. I’m hoping for some really big wins Golden Globes night and Oscar night of course.
Well, I’m dumb and old I guess, as I just don’t understand the appeal of TDK.
Let’s get back to talking about The Wrestler, which I can’t wait to see.
Zachareck is a dimwit.
I don’t see what’s the big deal about a guy not liking “The Wrestler”… it’s his job to write down his opinion honestly, not keep its MetaCritic rating high.
I saw it on opening night, really really liked it, but I have to say, I expected a little more, especially after The Fountain.
Carlos Balbás-Espín,
Sorry…I didn’t mean to be rude at all. I was just responding to a comment that you made about older people and their liking TDK.
My mom is certainly not a film expert by any means. I am just commenting about older people and their ability to enjoy the film, just as you did in your post.
No need to resort to name calling. Or to imply that my mother cannot speak…
Anyway, this board is supposed to be about The Wrestler. So, on that note, let me say, I am quite confident that Mickey Rourke will be winning the Oscar, a la Marion Cotillard last year.
I disagree with Turan too. I think sometimes critics should just sit back and watch a film without trying to analyze every minute. While its true that the film is sentimental and melodramatic at times….I never felt overly manipulated.
The only thing I agree with in regards to Turan’s review is his disapproval of the scene where Rourke quits the deli counter. While the buildup to Rourke cutting his finger is expertly done, his not just insulting the customers but wrecking the place was a part of the scene that could have been trimmed down some and still made the same emotional impact. Letting it go on that long was Aronofsky and Rourke’s one case of self-indulgence.
Otherwise, he completely misses the mark. I can understand his, and others’, disapproval of the Evan Rachel Wood subplot, even if I don’t agree with it, but the wrestling matches are not exploitative. They would have been if the other wrestlers and the promoters had been the stereotypical sleazy characters, but since this is theater as much as sport, and since they show us the camaraderie Rourke has with the other wrestlers, who genuinely like and respect him, they come off as honest. And as other writers have already pointed out, the stripping scenes are essential because they show Tomei, like Rourke, is competing in a younger person’s game (and the movie never makes a point of it, but she always dances to an old hard rock song rather than something contemporary), and the lengths she has to go to in order to keep up. And the last dance she gives, when she realizes she can’t do it anymore, is done with no histrionics at all, just great acting.
Ok, Alex, so we’re taking that road… Fine by me.
Then, I’m just gonna say it: “The Wrestler” deserves a Best Picture Oscar nomination more than “Milk”, “Doubt”, “Frost/Nixon”, and yes, even more than “Slumdog Millionaire” and “The Dark Knight”.
I know it won’t get it, but damn well deserves it.
There.
Are you all the same person *-)?
Leave a reply
All comments should respect the Awards Daily House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please let us know, quoting the comment in question.