Chapter 1145: Seeking benevolence and getting benevolence
Putting aside "The Fight" for the time being, in fact, the expectations surrounding "The Butterfly Effect" have always been there, waiting for the release of the movie with a curious, provocative, probing, and trouble-seeking attitude——
As Anson's first film as a producer, and a statement of transformation attempts after "Elephant" and "Walking with Songs", Anson's efforts to get rid of the vase image can be seen in all aspects, and the general public has always been controlled by prejudice and discrimination. Refusing to take off the colored glasses and give objective judgment, the attention focused on the "butterfly effect" becomes more and more intense.
This is a good thing, when the quality of the movie is excellent; but it is also a bad thing, like this.
"Rolling Stone," twenty-five points, "Not even Anson Wood's looks could make such a boring movie. Man, where's your memory? Have you lost other memories without a diary? Your whole life is Fragment? ”
"New York Post", twenty-five points, "The plot needs to be good-looking, the characters need to be good-looking, the acting needs to be good-looking, the twists and turns need to be reflective, and the story needs to be reflective as well as good-looking. If only good-looking is all that is needed, then it has it all. Yes. ”
A swarm of negative reviews came to my face.
What people have been worried about has finally happened, without any surprise——
When vases try to transform, or try to break the constraints and broaden their acting horizons, it is often a disaster. They have everything but nothing. In the end, even the appearance cannot save the works that have penetrated the center of the earth.
There are countless similar stories in Hollywood.
Brooke Shields, Andrew McCarthy, Robert Lowe, Jessica Alba, Megan Fox, Zach- Zac-Efron blah blah blah.
The list goes on.
Now, add Anson Wood to the mix.
Film critics are talented people, no matter how successful or brilliant "Cat and Mouse Game" or "Spider-Man" is, if they don't like it, they just don't like it and will criticize them mercilessly.
Moreover, don't forget that even if "Elephant" wins the Palme d'Or, its media reviews are still mixed, far from being excellent.
Right now, the quality of "Butterfly Effect" is lower than expected, and negative reviews suddenly hit it like a storm.
It’s not just any media, it’s all authoritative media with a name; at the same time, it’s not a lukewarm negative review, but a ten or twenty point bad feedback.
To this extent, it can even be called "criticism".
The situation is very, very serious.
Among the first batch of 23 media reviews, negative reviews accounted for nearly half, which is not at the same level as "Raging Sea".
The atmosphere is grim.
Many media have said that Anson's vision for selecting scripts needs to be verified.
Before the release of "The Butterfly Effect", the media also praised Anson for turning stone into gold. All his works so far have been a great success, and he is worthy of his discerning eye.
As soon as he turned around, the media all said that Anson still needs to grow up:
In previous works, Anson did not have the right to choose. The crew chose the actors, so the success of those works cannot be attributed to Anson.
"Butterfly Effect" is Anson's first time as a producer, which validates his personal vision. Now it seems that Anson still has a long way to go.
However, this is the reality, the cruel and cold reality. When you succeed, everything is right; when you fail, everything is wrong.
Whether it's a compliment or a criticism, everything is just a bubble.
The situation is indeed not good; but it is not entirely so.
Among the twenty-three reviews, there are still four neutral reviews and nine positive reviews.
"Village Voice," sixty-five points.
"The movie's understanding of the Butterfly Effect is too superficial, too straightforward, and too dramatic. It is suitable for viewers who exclaim 'masterpiece' every time they see 'Reversal' and spend an afternoon with a bucket of popcorn. However, The only bright spot in this silly movie is Anson.
He uses his charisma to grab the audience's attention and avoid being completely lost in the storm. Incredibly, he gives a convincing performance in some important scenes that make the story convincing.
Unfortunately, it was not enough to last until I arrived at my home refrigerator. ”
The "refrigerator" mentioned here is the refrigerator theory:
After watching a movie, you don't realize the loopholes or shortcomings of the movie until you go home and open the refrigerator. That means it is a success of the genre, and those loopholes should not be the reason for criticizing the movie.
Los Angeles Weekly, sixty-five points.
"It's hard to believe that this script was the work of two screenwriters who have been polishing it for seven years. They are obviously frat kids who lack life experience. Their minds are filled with the self-impressed idea that 'a man can save the world by saving his lover', and they don't even bother to express their feelings about butterflies. More research on the effects
But what’s even harder to believe is that the acting turned out to be the film’s biggest highlight.
The chemistry between the three actors Anson Wood, Rachel McAdams, and Heath Ledger is impressive. From their eyes to their body language to their understanding of the characters, they successfully dug out the characters in this childish and superficial script. emotional context and a convincing performance.
I don't like it. But I don’t hate it either.
Maybe I'll remember it because of Anson Wood. ”
Both are authoritative media, with similar scores and even similar content, the "Los Angeles Times" and the "Village Voice" unexpectedly reached a consensus.
Other reviews are very similar.
They generally believe that the plot of the movie is too straightforward and only provides the most superficial understanding of the butterfly effect. This makes the movie fall into a series of reversal whirlpools, and ultimately fails to dig out more room for thinking.
However, the actors' performances and charisma save the film.
At least, the movie is still worth watching,
This is also the reason why they rated it neutral. It is not good or bad. There are bad parts but also good parts, so they are still willing to show mercy.
The scores are also hovering on the edge of passing.
Things are getting interesting——
Whether it's a negative review or a neutral review, the focus is entirely on Anson.
Obviously, this "vase" is a double-edged sword. He can bring attention, but he also steals the focus, causing the success or failure of the film to a large extent revolve around him.
To a certain extent, directors McGee and Eric had this purpose in mind when they found Anson, and now they are begging for mercy.
However, the two directors were still shocked.
The script that they were once so confident and proud of was actually criticized by the media as useless. If it weren't for Anson to save some face, the storm of bad reviews the film encountered might have been even worse.
They originally thought that Anson was riding their coattails. Their script was perfect and they refused to be touched or pointed out by others. They imagined that the media and the audience would be so shocked by the story that they worshiped them. However, it turned out that it was reversed and it was Anson who was riding their coattails. He relied on Anson to save a complete disaster.
Mikey and Eric...were a little nervous.
Despite this, take a deep breath, regain some composure, and grab the last straw——
So, what about the good reviews?
In the first batch of media reviews, weren’t there nine positive reviews?
(End of chapter)