The Critic

London, 1934 - Arch vicious theatre critic Jimmy Erskine (Ian McKellen) is a homosexual and is forever close to being arrested either with his current live in lover and secretary, Turner or when picking men up in the park. Eventually caught, he is fired from his job by his boss Viscount Brooke (Mark Strong) and so looks for revenge by getting up and coming actress Nina (Gemma Arterton) to seduce the married and famous Brooke in exchange for good reviews, so that Erskine can blackmail him into getting his job back. Complications ensue.

Very dark and occasionally wry look at the role of this powerful critic and his desperation to cling on to power and notoriety whatever it takes, which McKellen, sneering playfully throughout, obviously thoroughly enjoys playing. Overall, it is a little too relentlessly dark and the notion of Erskine convincing Nina to seduce Brooke doesn't wholly stacks up. That said it's well put together, has a nice score and McKellen is inevitably rather good.

It's 1934, you're in London. You go see a play in a theatre. You see an old man writing vigorously in a notebook. This man is a critic, somebody with the power to raise an actress's career to stardom or send it crashing down around them. This is the premise of the newly released British period drama called THE CRITIC. Jimmy Erskine (Ian McKellan) is a gay theatre critic for the Daily Chronicle, which is undergoing drastic changes since its leader passed away, giving the reigns to the son, David Brooke (Mark Strong). Worried about the old guard being fired, Jimmy does everything he can to keep his job. Actress Nina Land (Gemma Arterton) gets caught up in his schemes, forming a strange relationship. Escalation ensues! In an interview, McKellan has described his character perfectly using only one word, curdled. Jimmy has become rotten to the core, brutally mean in his critiques, manipulative and selfish to the people around him. McKellan does such a great job in the role he made me hate Ian! This movie has some pacing issues for me. It's a very slow burn, and then it rushes too fast near the end. They also don't do a good enough job in establishing the relationships between certain characters. Sometimes I didn't know who was who to who. I heard from somewhere that they had done some rewrites and reshoots, which might explain some things, I just didn't get enough payoff from the slow burn. I still highly recommend this movie simply for seeing Ian McKellan in a very interesting role and having a very fun time doing it.

I had hoped for so much more from The Critic due to its premise, title and cast. I was bitterly disappointed. The pointless and fruitless direction of this film is frustrating. We see a random array of events that add little to no value. It seems like we are watching a bunch of uneventful situations playout, I found myself asking so what? Humanity is not great at times but why did we need to see a film about this and how on earth did this get the green light? Where was the payoff or purpose? Veteran actor, Ian Mckellen, gives a solid performance but it is not enough to save this pitiful excuse of a film.

If you saw Sir Ian McKellen with fellow thesp Sir Derek Jacobi in the television sitcom "Vicious" from around ten years ago, you'll be able to anticipate the gist of his characterisation of the acerbic theatre critic "Erskine" who is way more famed for distributing bile rather than bouquets. His new boss (Mark Strong) wants the newspaper to appeal to an altogether more wholesome family audience and so wants him to tone things down a bit. "Yeah, right" thinks he - and then his own behaviour gets him into trouble with the police and given one month's notice from his job. Facing looming ignominy, he determines to get the lowdown on his ostensibly pure as the driven snow aristocratic proprietor and to that end recruits aspiring actress "Nina" (Gemma Arterton) of whom he has been much less than flattering in the past. Rather gullibly, she agrees to become a pawn in his manipulate game that leads to a series of misadventures and thence to a tragedy that maybe puts the role of opinionated curmudgeon into perspective. This starts of quite entertainingly with plenty of pith and ghastliness from the star, but very quickly it descends into an entirely far-fetched and rather disappointing affair (no pun intended) that plays to just about every stereotype as it rather sadly sets out to prove that the best bits are all in the trailers. At it's best, the writing does make you smile and writhe a little uncomfortably in your cinema seat, but for the most part it's just predicable with characters that it's fairly easy not to like - except, maybe, Alfred Enoch's factotum "Tom" whom at least starts off with some shred of human decency to counter "Erskine" and his selfishness. Ben Barnes shows he is ageing well but again hasn't really enough of a part to work with developing his lovestruck character and Strong is really anything but. It does look good, but it's too reliant on a shock factor that isn't so very original and that soon peters out.

Anyone who thinks this tale exaggerated was not alive when critics for the papers really did have this much power, which survived into the 1970s to some degree. Ian McKellen delivers a powerful portrayal of an aged, egotistical, and vain theatre critic of the 1930s.

Walter Kerr in New York in the 1950s and 1960s had such power but was, I am pleased to say, not anything like the corrupt McKellen character. The story is based upon the novel CURTAIN CALL by the interesting novelist Anthony Quinn (no relation to the actor of that name), who enjoys writing stories set in the early to mid-twentieth century in England. I have read a couple and have more sitting around waiting for my attention. McKellen's character is gay, a condition not unknown to McKellen himself I believe. An adoring younger man lives with him and looks after him, played with quiet devotion by an excellent young actor named Alfred Enoch who underplays the role so well that it makes the entire story more plausible. McKellen's character walks a dangerous tightrope in numerous ways and seems perversely to enjoy the thrill of taking such risks. And he progressively pushes out the boundaries of his audacity and pomposity to see just how far he can go, which is pretty far. But then the actress Nina Land come into the story, played by Gemma Arterton. With breath-taking audacity, McKellen believes he can make use of her in a complex blackmail plot to regain his position as critic, having just been fired for being caught with his trousers down with a chap, if you see what I mean. Remember this was all illegal then. He engages in this plot because his boss, the titled owner of a major newspaper, is romantically obsessed with the girl, despite being married to Romola Garai. (I didn't say anything!) The gloomy and obsessed owner of the paper is magnificently played by Mark Strong. Indeed, all the acting in this film is finely attuned to some invisible tuning-fork to get just the right pitch. I guess we can congratulate the director, Anand Tucker, for making all that happen, and delivering to us such a moody and atmospheric study of moral corruption in London's theatreland.