So this is late. Shockingly, I went to see a "Planet of the Apes" related movie two weeks or so after it was released. I have no excuse. But it does give me an out on the trap I hoped to avoid when I first began this movie section here.I wanted to avoid reviewing movies. Of course, essentially that is what I have done.
No apologies, not to any of the films I hated or the dumbass who really liked that dull-witted Another Earth movie (seriously....who would leave a COMMENT on a website asking for my "credentials" over such a mundane lifeless piece of shit). See? Already you can tell this isn't a review. But damn, it seems like a BLOG now.
I had hoped to avoid that too. I hate blogs; "Here is what I ate today" or "I am so blessed." That's all great I am only mocking a little but I don't want to do that (I did have some awesome Chinese noodles I bought at an Asian Grocery store on Kimball Ave by the highway in Chicago and I am blessed with incredible good looks).
What I wanted to write about is perception and movies. Usually when people do this they are writing about some tedious Godard film (I admit. Most of the time, I hate Godard). But it doesn't need to be high brow. We perceive the low brow every day. I sometimes get up early enough to watch morning talk shows. I once watched part of that Ozzy Osbourne reality show thing.
The first two opinions I had of Rise of the Planet of the Apes came from professional journalists, writing for a major newspaper. I saw their interaction on Facebook. One reviewed the movie. The other wrote an excellent "history" of the previous "apes" efforts. The latter liked the movie while the former disliked it.
No apologies, not to any of the films I hated or the dumbass who really liked that dull-witted Another Earth movie (seriously....who would leave a COMMENT on a website asking for my "credentials" over such a mundane lifeless piece of shit). See? Already you can tell this isn't a review. But damn, it seems like a BLOG now.
I had hoped to avoid that too. I hate blogs; "Here is what I ate today" or "I am so blessed." That's all great I am only mocking a little but I don't want to do that (I did have some awesome Chinese noodles I bought at an Asian Grocery store on Kimball Ave by the highway in Chicago and I am blessed with incredible good looks).
What I wanted to write about is perception and movies. Usually when people do this they are writing about some tedious Godard film (I admit. Most of the time, I hate Godard). But it doesn't need to be high brow. We perceive the low brow every day. I sometimes get up early enough to watch morning talk shows. I once watched part of that Ozzy Osbourne reality show thing.
The first two opinions I had of Rise of the Planet of the Apes came from professional journalists, writing for a major newspaper. I saw their interaction on Facebook. One reviewed the movie. The other wrote an excellent "history" of the previous "apes" efforts. The latter liked the movie while the former disliked it.
I Hate This Movie. If you Like It You Are A Pretentious Douchebag. I don't even really like, Breathless, so THERE.
But let's look at this movie, this film of the rise of the apes.
It is about an hyper intelligent ape who becomes that way via testing for a drug aimed at defeating Alzheimers. This is Citizen Kane plot-wise compared to ANY film in the previous series. This could almost HAPPEN. They also make you FEEL something for a CGI ape. It isn't even Roddy McDowell in an ape costume. Who didn't love Roddy McDowell?
The film also make sense within its own parameters. There are no real red herrings. The performances are all, at worst, tolerable. Tom Felton (Harry Potter's Drago Malfoy) is basically used as a device to toss references to the old movies in but that is hardly his fault. John Lithgow delivers a fine performance in a small role, understated but real. James Franciscus...oh wait...he isn't in this. James Franco, is fine. He doesn't get to show his skill as he did in 127 Hours (another Best Actor Oscar robbery, King's Speech my ass) but he is fine. And stop whining about him on the Oscars. He was fine there too. No one is ever really GOOD doing that. Awards shows blow.
So what is to HATE? I get not liking it as a matter of taste. But hate?
I suspect there are a lot of things going on when we hate something that isn't THAT bad. We might have expectations that are unreasonably high. Previews might stoke us up for a film that was never really made. The best bits might ALL be in the previews. The people who edited the previews often seem more adept editors than those who edit the films. If I hit the lottery the preview editors will be editing the entire first Patrick Ogle produced film. I want the ghost of Erik Von Stroheim or Billy Bob Thornton--someone nuts and on a career suicide trajectory--to direct. In this expectation mode we walk in expecting a GREAT film and find a GOOD film and it pisses us off. It makes us HATE the movie.
Sometimes you see a film again and reassess it. But then what does that mean? Did you like it better when you saw it on cable because you perceived merits you missed? Or did you not have to pay $10 to get in and $8 for popcorn (and god forbid it is in 3D because you really get clipped on that).But regardless of the reason you do reassess. I am sure were I too see that horrible Resident Evil IV movie again I could relax and just stare at Milla Jovovich.
It can maybe be chalked up to environment when the shift is only from HATE to mild dislike (theater vs. home). I could discuss LOVING a film like Rise of the Planet of the Apes too, which is equally irrational and possibly based on blind fanboyness, How the fuck did anyone sit through any of that second set of Star Wars films? I wanted to poke out my eyes watching the first one.
Fanboy or Fangirlness are explanation one
But this love could also be based on wildly LOW expectations. Like when I saw 2012, the disaster movie. I had similar expectations to what most people would have watching a 7 hour documentary on Soviet farm collectives made under Stalin. But in 2012 as long as shit was blowing up or Woody Harrelson was on screen? I was tolerant. Harrelson should be in every movie by the way.
This movie does not suck and was not directed by Godard, proving Godard sucked.
An example of where I realized something I thought SUCKED but not only didn't SUCK but was pretty close to great, was Terry Gilliam's 12 Monkeys. I saw it in the theater and hated it like poison. HATED it. Then, years later a friend who I hadn't seen in awhile busted it out and said; "Hey this is really good, want to watch it?" I didn't feel like being rude.
And after the second viewing? I thought it was pretty close to a great movie. What happened? Was I just in a piss poor mood at first viewing? I do not recall that. It wasn't that MANY years between viewings. I was an adult in both situations with my tastes pretty well set. I mean I loved Every Which Way But Loose when I was 11 but my opinion was wildly different at 16.
There are no conclusions I can come to on this. It is more a starting point for discussion and thought. It may also just be an excuse to mention Godard and Every Which Way But Loose in the same piece.
And after the second viewing? I thought it was pretty close to a great movie. What happened? Was I just in a piss poor mood at first viewing? I do not recall that. It wasn't that MANY years between viewings. I was an adult in both situations with my tastes pretty well set. I mean I loved Every Which Way But Loose when I was 11 but my opinion was wildly different at 16.
There are no conclusions I can come to on this. It is more a starting point for discussion and thought. It may also just be an excuse to mention Godard and Every Which Way But Loose in the same piece.
RSS Feed