Everyone is waiting to watch as the final nail is driven into Amelia’s coffin — for a short minute there it seemed like it might be able to pull itself out of the bad reviews category — herein will lie the rub for this new Best Pic paradigm: how do you honor Big Hollywood if the sweeping epics that Oscar used to love can’t get arrested by the chorus of film critics and voices online that hand down a verdict before the public gets a crack at it? As an old lady I know this is true: because there is a chorus on the internet that says a movie is bad (or good) it still doesn’t mean that the vast crowds out there in America and across the world are going to agree. Occasionally they agree but more often than not, they don’t.
Here’s the thing, though – when writing a review, why not make it a good read? Ebert’s recent review of Amelia isn’t just a think piece on himself and why he’s right that the movie sucked and where it doesn’t work and why it is going to bomb — most importantly, he doesn’t yarn on about how he would knew it would fail and how right he has now become – is there anything more annoying than that? He writes:
She was an early feminist role model, an American hero not tainted like Lindbergh by chumminess with the Nazis. A few years after her death, U.S women would be asked to hang up their aprons, put on overalls and work on the production lines of the war. She was the real thing. Yes, she signed contracts to endorse chewing gum, soap and a fashion line, but she needed the money to finance her flights, and she always chewed the gum, used the soap, wore the clothes.
Ebert suggests that the raw material itself is why the movie’s plot suffers – how can the story be told any other way without making things up at random? At first I thought one way to tell the story would be the highlight Amelia’s weaknesses. This PBS special on Earhart explained that one of her navigators no longer wanted to fly with her because he “didn’t trust her as a pilot.” On her last flight she made several crucial errors that would have helped save her life.
Anyway, another one bites the dust. Too bad on that.
Meanwhile, David Poland appears to be one who truly relishes the opportunity to pile on:
Q: Why Did Amelia Earhart disappear in 1937?
A; To avoid being embarrassed by the movie about her 72 years later.
Q: Can three horrible fake accents equal one irredeemable movie?
A: You bet ya.
Q. What’s the difference between Amelia and two hours of uninterrupted sleep?
A. The latter is uninterrupted.
Q: What’s so funny about Amelia and Trannys 2’s DVD being released in the same week?
A: Trannys 2 is more entertaining.
An actual review to follow…
The funny thing is, he actually says “review to follow” as if anyone is going to bother reading the review? Or maybe they’re all anticipating a true massacre.