smashtheelder

All the reviews for this movie seem to be either love it or hate it. Well, what about those of us who were just unimpressed? I didn't certainly didn't like the movie, but I didn't full-on hate it either. Maybe it's because I'm not an American, and thus am not connected to its themes?

Well, anyway, I was turned off by the opening. The whole thing of introducing the movie in the style of a country music commercial (I assume that's what was going on) felt like it was trying hard to be clever. Like, "Look at me! I'm a smart movie with lots of subversive satire to say!" Well, it wasn't clever. It was loud, obnoxious, and tedious. Am I supposed to be impressed by the insight that those commercials are garish and tacky?

The actual technique of the movie isn't bad. It jumps all over the place and shows off lots of different characters having their different stories. I'd probably enjoy it very much if the stories weren't totally boring.

The worst one is the reporter from the BBC. It seemed like every scene of hers went like this: she talks to someone; she tells them she's British; the person is bemused by her ignorance; she is shocked by something they say, which further shows her ignorance. It was kind of amusing the first time, but there wasn't much substance to it. And then she kept coming back. I get it, the lady reporter is an ignorant limey, can't you go a little deeper?

Then there was the bad singer. After her first scene, her story was obvious: no talent, but she gets ahead because she's willing to show some skin and will eventually be crushed to learn that's the only reason people listen to her sing. It could have been interesting, but you didn't get to see much of her life outside bad singing and showing cleavage, so when the penny dropped for her, I just thought, "Okay. And?"

The aging lady country singer was kind of interesting, I guess. I cringed a little out of embarrassment for her when she started rambling on stage, and it was kinda sad how she was clearly in poor health, but she insisted on still going out there. Maybe the movie would have been better if it had expanded on her story instead of throwing in a bunch of random people sleeping around, as if that makes for a worthy narrative.

The whole thing with the politician... I don't know, man. It was just white noise to me. I guess that might have been the point. He just spouts a bunch of slogans and then has a rally at the end. Maybe it's good satire if you care about American politics? Then again, I enjoyed All The King's Men, which takes a much harsher look at a populist politician, so that shouldn't have to be an obstacle to me enjoying it.

There were other stories, like Lily Tomlin cheating on her husband, but they were all forgettable. So much for the plot and characters.

I thought the songs were alright. I'm Easy was a pleasant tune, and the rest was nice enough country music. I think it wasn't worth bloating the film to over two and a half hours long, though. They could have cut most of them short to bring the film to a tidy two hours long.

Nashville is a pretty crummy and boring movie. I think no-one would want to watch it if it didn't have a reputation as a classic. It was at least better than the director's earlier film, M*A*S*H. I despised that one. Nashville at least presents a refinement of his technique. If only he could apply it to a story worth watching.

It's true that film makers were still feeling their way in the 1900s, but that's no excuse for a film to be boring now. Look at "Le voyage dans la lune" or "The Great Train Robbery", both of which came several years before Ben-Hur 1907. Even "Sherlock Holmes Baffled", a silly trick film from 1900, is still amusing.

The story is fragmented and would only make sense if you already knew it. (Which, to be fair, was likely at the time; Ben-Hur was as popular then as Harry Potter is now.) The chariot race is pathetic, being nothing more than the horses passing the camera several times until the movie ends. It would have been difficult to film an exciting chariot race within the limitations of the time, but this was not a good workaround. The only saving grace of this movie is that, like others of the time, it is short, barely ten minutes long.

Ben-Hur 1907 is proof that crappy cash-ins have been around even in the early days of cinema. We are fortunate it has survived, if only because that prevents any mystique from being attached to it, as has happened with films like "The Great Gatsby (1925)".