Normally I try not to stress about “best” lists since I officially don’t really care about these things, but why is Midnight in Paris doing so well on year-end lists? It’s in Ebert’s top 10. Richard Brody put it at 15th best movie of the year for the New Yorker. It got a Golden Globe nomination. (In the comedy category, but still.) It’s 18 here, ahead of Drive, The Skin I Live In, and Bridesmaids which are all movies that I will probably think about when I think about 2011 movies. We Need To Talk About Kevin didn’t even make the top 50.
Can someone explain to me why? It’s very pretty, because Woody Allen knows how to shoot a city, and it’s in Paris, and Paris is pretty. But it’s so bad. I shouldn’t even need to explain why it’s so bad. I just don’t understand. The whole thing is just ego-stroking fantasy stuff, isn’t it? Woody Allen used to be able to write smart woman characters.
-
rgr-pop liked this
-
wronglikeright said:
Because, I’m guessing, it’s about nostalgia, which comforts a lot of critics, especially ones who are currently looking back over their lives (Ebert). The valentine to an era they grew up studying probably trumps the lack of good female characters.
-
wronglikeright liked this
-
mootpoint posted this
