Interesting and thought-provoking
France, 1820s. A young poet, Lucien de Rubempre, moves to Paris with the aim of being published. After a few menial jobs he finds work as a journalist, an art critic. Here he sees the corruption and influence of the press and how to play their game.
Interesting, thought-provoking...and a little disappointing. I watched this because it is based on a de Balzac novel but set my expectations rather low before watching this. It appeared to be a period piece potentially revolving around the social mores of the time. These sorts of movies always bore and frustrate me as they usually involve some sort of Machiavellian scheme or humiliation that rests on something really arbitrary by today's customs but usually ends up in someone killing themselves or dying in a duel in the movie.
The first few scenes hinted that this was the path it was going to take but then thankfully de Rubempre whisks himself off to Paris and the story starts in earnest.
Things get really interesting once he becomes a journalist and we see the corruption of the press, how they create news rather than report on it, how controversy, even when based on lies, sells. Sound familiar? Yes, you could easily shift the setting to the 21st century and it would be incredibly accurate.
So what we have is a study on the media and how its as bad in reality in the 21st century as it was in a fictional novel set in the 1820s.
Unfortunately, this great examination and condemnation of the media doesn't go anywhere. Rather than continue to stick the knife into the media, the second half of the movie follows a more subdued, less pointed, course. It ends up more a Machiavellian period piece than an evisceration of the media. It's also drawn out unnecessarily.
The ending is reasonably profound and uplifting though.
So a bit disappointing in that it got my hopes up by the halfway mark and then disappointed me but still quite interesting regardless.
Interesting, thought-provoking...and a little disappointing. I watched this because it is based on a de Balzac novel but set my expectations rather low before watching this. It appeared to be a period piece potentially revolving around the social mores of the time. These sorts of movies always bore and frustrate me as they usually involve some sort of Machiavellian scheme or humiliation that rests on something really arbitrary by today's customs but usually ends up in someone killing themselves or dying in a duel in the movie.
The first few scenes hinted that this was the path it was going to take but then thankfully de Rubempre whisks himself off to Paris and the story starts in earnest.
Things get really interesting once he becomes a journalist and we see the corruption of the press, how they create news rather than report on it, how controversy, even when based on lies, sells. Sound familiar? Yes, you could easily shift the setting to the 21st century and it would be incredibly accurate.
So what we have is a study on the media and how its as bad in reality in the 21st century as it was in a fictional novel set in the 1820s.
Unfortunately, this great examination and condemnation of the media doesn't go anywhere. Rather than continue to stick the knife into the media, the second half of the movie follows a more subdued, less pointed, course. It ends up more a Machiavellian period piece than an evisceration of the media. It's also drawn out unnecessarily.
The ending is reasonably profound and uplifting though.
So a bit disappointing in that it got my hopes up by the halfway mark and then disappointed me but still quite interesting regardless.
- grantss
- Mar 19, 2023