…Jon Stewart really ripped into “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” the other night, as if that’s somehow novel at this stage. Seriously — Wells, Defamer, Poland, Carr, the vitriol is tired and largely unfair. The sad thing is, most of the sniping comes — shocker — free of any reasoned debate about WHY “Button” is problematic, a conversation I’d love to have if any of these schoolyard bullies would be willing. Sadly, none of them seem to be, but it’s not Stewart’s job to be reasonable. He’s a comedian, after all.
Comments
25 responses to “You’ve already seen it, but…”
There’s already more than plenty of debate and very good reasons why a lot of people despised The Curious Case of Forrest Gump out there, Kris. Comedians and op-ed columnists don’t have to trot them out every damn time they mention it.
Guess what? It’s the Oscar season, and if there’s a nominee that sucks, people tend to tear into it. So stop whining and telling us all to play nice. Christ, you’re starting to sound like Sasha…
The criticism I keep hearing is “it lacks substance.”
I must have seen a different movie. The one I saw was deeply meditative, introspective, and hauntingly profound, made with beautiful precision and the kind of elegant, slowly-unraveling beauty that defines the most affecting of films. It stayed with me for a long time; I kept coming back to its themes of time, age, purpose, circumstance, love… it haunted me. It’s a mood piece that was at times deeply unsettling and magical. It does have problems, as the Katrina framing device that was really not necessary, and sections that are perhaps superfluous or overly long, but the thing is a big and beautiful piece of life that is always a wonder to watch.
Colbert’s comment was funnier – “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button nominated for 13 Oscars. It seems Americans DO approve of torture!”
Robert: Thanks for proving my point.
Jon Stewart’s not a film critic, he’s a talk show host. He doesn’t owe you an explanantion of his opinion. Get off your high horse.
Everybody get out your fanboy labels now!!!
This is definitely stemming from TDK’s omission (see, I didn’t even say “snub”) at the Oscars. You can guarantee that films like The Reader, Frost/Nixon, and in this case and many others, Curious Case wouldn’t be receiving close to half of the criticism if TDK had been nominated. But because of the omission, people are going to compare other films, namely these three, to what is clearly the most celebrated movie of the past few years.
And Kris, I’m kind of in agreement with Will. In the context of a comedic show, an explanation is not owed. But if you hear these things from a real critic without explanation, then yea, that’s not right.
And what exactly was your point, Kris? Poor ol’ David Fincher’s lavishly produced, massively hyped, big budget, multiple Oscar-nominated film just isn’t getting the attention and love it deserves? That people aren’t allowed to poke fun at it? That if the emperor says his wardrobe is beautiful, we better agree with him or else we just don’t “get it”? I know your point couldn’t be that there aren’t any reasonable criticisms of the film, because that would be either dishonest or stupid. Here’s the most comprehensive one I have yet read, I hope it meets your standards:
http://dglee.blogspot.com/2008/12/movie-review-curious-case-of-benjamin.html
Scott, I’m not sure if I entirely buy your argument. Certainly, there is some backlash due to TDK’s snub (yeah, I went there!), but I knew long before the nominations were announced that The Curious Case of Forrest Gump was going to get a ton of nominations, and I hated it then as much as I do now. If anything is a victim of TDK backlash, it’s The Reader, which I disliked (mainly because Daldry missed the point of the novel), but isn’t nearly as bad as people are making it out to be.
Will: Get off yours. I said as much in my note at the top. It just gave me the opportunity to mention something that’s been irritating me as of late.
Testy crowd. Get over it.
No, that’s not my point, Robert, but I appreciate the pathetic attempt at over dramatizing the thing. People are certainly allowed to poke fun at it.
But the bandwagon, schoolyard mentality gets tired, especially when there aren’t enough reasoned counterpoints out there like David Denby’s, for instance (which I assume you haven’t read, considering your link to a piss-poor analysis with no insight that does little more than pull the “it’s ‘Forrest Gump 2’ and here’s why” card). Just a lot of babies sniping, and I don’t think the film deserves that.
All of this is coming from the guy who was the first one on the record calling the film cold and distant, mind you, something that became a popular criticism. The first guy who said Brad Pitt’s performance was off and that the lead role is too passive for the film’s own good, etc. But I also understand the value of repeat viewings and “Button” is a film that, more than most, I think, deepens on multiple looks.
Should a film take multiple viewings to settle in? No. Is it a proper defense? Not really. But it is a film with some intricacies and the Gump comparisons, however valid on the surface, are mean-spirited and lazy in the final analysis and the overall sense of hatred toward this film is, again, irritating and uncalled for.
But children will be children and this is the net, so that’s fine. And Stewart has a right to his comedy, something I would never begrudge him. Seeing this clip posted everywhere, mostly at outlets that share the opinion that “Button” “sucks” is what drove me to make a comment.
I think Jon did offer his reason why. His reason was that it was boring and put him to sleep. Whether people choose to see this as a legitimate reason is a whole different point. And, I don’t really think it’s fair to call him unreasonable. If he didn’t like it, he didn’t like it. He doesn’t have to explain himself to anyone.
Like I said, it’s not his job to be reasonable.
I think that if Stewart had Pitt or Fincher on as a guest, then he would be crapping on Slumdog.
I agree, Diego. Like I said, my beef isn’t with Stewart, it just reminded me of the hate train, because the clip showed up everywhere. I’m a Stewart fan just like the next guy, if that somehow got lost in all of this.
(WARNING: SOME OF WHAT FOLLOWS COULD BE CONSIDERED SPOILERS)
Kris, I personally have been very forthcoming with my issues with CCBB without resorting to pathetic insults, but I’ll go ahead and list them again:
The concept of the movie is flawed: I realize this has more to do with the short story, but it’s still an issue. I’m sure I’m not ruining anything for anyone considering the storyline by saying having someone born as a baby and then dying as a baby is a huge plot hole when it’s about someone living life backwards.
The script is awful: Eric Roth is known for self-indulgence in his writing. His scripts always reek of “look at me” writing. It was obvious in Forrest Gump (a movie I love, by the way) and it’s obvious here. He took a pigmy of a short story and turned it into a boring, lumbering elephant of a movie. The most screaming example I have of how poorly structured the movie is is in regards to the clock. There is no mistaking that clock has something to do with Benjamin’s “ailment,” yet it’s not dug into and more deeply because Roth was too busy writing in unnecessary additions like having Daisy be in the hospital during Katrina. It served no purpose and was simply there for Roth’s own self-indulgence.
The early effects are distracting: on a second viewing (yes, I watched it a second time with friends and lowered my barely 3 stars with an extra /5 star for excellent production values down to 2.5) I discovered the parts I actually enjoyed started as soon as it became obvious it was Brad Pitt and nothing more than makeup. As soon as Digital Brad is dropped the movie instantly got better for me and that’s too much of a coincidence to ignore.
Benjamin’s Relationship with young Daisy is creepy: I’m sorry, but when you consider the story hinges on everyone else believing that Benjamin is already old having an 80-year old looking manchild sneaking into a young girl’s room is creepy. The fact her aunt found them in Daisy’s bedroom together and her only reaction was to say to someone she believes is 80-years old she found in her pre-teen niece’s bedroom at night “You should be ashamed” is beyond unbelievable. I think it’s safe to say 99% of the population would have killed him on the spot assuming the worst.
Daisy is a bitch: I hated the character of Daisy. I want to point out that I love Cate Blancett. She is what I like to call intelligent sexy, but I disliked her in this movie to the point I timed my bathroom breaks for when she was onscreen. I’m not kidding. I hated her in this movie.
The “Big Plot Twist” can be seen coming five minutes in: You know which twist I’m talking about, Kris, and I cannot believe you found this satisfying in the least. It was clear in the first seen who was who and the fact it took the almost entire movie before the “big reveal” in my mind proves what I was saying earlier about how poorly written the script was.
Finally, Benjamin is a boring character: Aside from him living his life backwards, I found absolutely nothing interesting about the character. I’ve complained about Brad Pitt’s performance, but I have since relented to acknowledge he played a boring character very well; the fault was not his.
I’m fully aware I’m not going to change your mind; however, you asked for someone to explain rather than blather on about how much it sucks. Well, there you go. Those are my issues with the movie and the “magic” so many people have referred to in this movie simply didn’t happen for me. There were just too many issues for me to overcome to do anything more than admire what $150 million can buy when making a movie.
“Benjamin’s Relationship with young Daisy is creepy: I’m sorry, but when you consider the story hinges on everyone else believing that Benjamin is already old having an 80-year old looking manchild sneaking into a young girl’s room is creepy.”
I had to stop here, because if this is a real criticism you have of the film, then you were never going to be on board for the concept, let alone the duration of the story.
Most of the rest I get and value, so thanks for bringing it all up. But I was aiming at certain writers in the media, not necessarily you or anyone else who has given their level-headed assessment of why the film is problematic.
I don’t get the hate either. So it has similarities to Forrest Gump? Is that the worst thing in the world these days? To emulate one of the best films of the last decade? It’s still a beautiful, breathtaking film that is A MILLION TIMES BETTER than Milk.
Also, I gather you didn’t read the actual words on the page when you keep talking about how bad the script was, because it is indeed beautifully written. I personally think Fincher mangled the tone, not Roth.
As for the “twist,” who cares? I certainly never said it was “satisfying.” It’s an entirely pointless aside in the story, in my opinion. But I DO think it allows for Roth to get into the points he wanted to make about starting your life all over again and passing the knowledge of a life lived on to a child. Nothing wrong with that.
Sneider: Well, that’s taking it a bit far, I’d say. But while we’re here, I must say: why does it always have to be a “this is better than that” discussion?
I would agree with you on the twist if it wasn’t for the fact it’s wholly a creation of Roth’s script which is an example of why I think the script is terrible. As a moviegoer, how well the sluglines and descriptive action is written doesn’t matter to me; movies are visual and scripts to me are more about structure, pacing, dialogue and setting and I think Roth failed miserably on all counts. For me the script was bloated and convoluted which I realize is a strange assessment to make about this type of story, but when it’s a story dealing with human characters and emotions the characters should at least resonate. They didn’t with me and I blame Roth.
Because it’s natural to want to compare films that are in competition with one another.
Zan: Simple comparison doesn’t breed intelligent criticism, though. Sure, it’s natural to do so, but you know, the point is to rise above that.
Button is a masterfully produced film with an albatross of a script keeping it from being anything more than pretty pictures with some good music.
“I appreciate the pathetic attempt at over dramatizing the thing.”
This is coming from the guy who wrote a several-paragraph tirade over a disagreement about a Milk screening. Now you are venting your anger over a ten-second clip making fun of a film showered with accolades…and I’m the drama queen.
“which I assume you haven’t read, considering your link to a piss-poor analysis with no insight that does little more than pull the ‘it’s вЂForrest Gump 2′ and here’s why’ card”
Now, just how am I going to take you seriously when you obviously only read the first paragraph and decided that that was enough?
“But it is a film with some intricacies”
What intricacies? The endless platitudes spouted by Button? The subplots that go nowhere? Just because the film proclaims itself to be “deep” doesn’t make it so.
“the Gump comparisons, however valid on the surface, are mean-spirited and lazy”
How can pointing out an obvious flaw in a film be considered both “valid” and “mean-spirited” at the same time? If it’s there, it’s there, and the only people who would be pissed off about that are people who were embarrassed that they didn’t notice it when they first saw the film.
“The ‘Big Plot Twist’ can be seen coming five minutes in”
I didn’t even see it as a twist, except maybe a reveal that Daisy is just as selfish as Benjamin. Heh, maybe they were perfect for each other.
Tirade over a disagreement? Hardly. And I’m not venting anger (can’t say the same for you). I’m expressing an irritation.
Also, I read the full link, Robert. The majority was blah, blah, blah, here are a bunch of Gump comparisons. Facile.
By the way, I hope you’re not insinuating that I didn’t pick up on the Gump comparisons, since the first you or anyone would have read about them would have been in this very space when I reviewed the script way back before anyone saw a glimpse of the film.
Wow this is getting heated. I feel like I’m on the imdb message boards.
Anyway, I just wanted to add that the last 10 seconds of this clip are really funny upon second viewing. It is very difficult for me to get angry at Jon Stewart.
And I can’t believe someone said Benjamin Button was a million times better than Milk. -_-