I forgot about this so I watched it on my Wii. The idea of Claudia Winkleman reviewing movies sounded a very wrong one. For one, she's a woman and we all know women can't concentrate long enough to watch anything over an hour long unless it includes moody vampire nonces, ABBA songs or a group of women suffering personal tragedies together, but being happy and empowered in the end. Thankfully she's accompanied by Danny Leigh, film reviewer for the Guadian and man. At least he will make sense. There are also spots fronted by the "team" of Chris Hewitt from Empire and Antonia Burke a novelist with no heart.
The show is broadcast live for some reason. The only reason seemed to be so
Chris Hewitt could interview Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley and... Spider-man... fuck, I've forgot his name... not Tobey Maguire, the new Spidey... he's in The Social Network... Andrew Garfield! I remembered. Anyway, they did a live interview and it was a shambles. Other than that nothing was really gained from the live broadcast.
Winkleman and Danny Leigh both give their opinions on the films and Winkleman actually spoke coherently, so I was pleasantly surprised. This could be interesting when they get movies they don't agree on if they get to bicker live. Other than that it's not really much different.
I thought it sucked. Just put a talking head on the show who knows about films. The 'red carpet' interview was like some Channel 5 pre-news 'show biz' slot. What a fuckup. Why they didn't get Mark Kermode to do is a mystery!
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, I forgot to mention that! Thank the heavens there isn't a hint Mark Kermode.
ReplyDeleteI actually deleted referring to the interview as like it was off Live from Studio Five, but knowing that show seemed such a horrific thing to admit. At least I now know Ali tunes in, even if he chooses to omit it's title in an attempt to hide it. I at least have the excuse that Helen watches it, but you... ;) Only joking, Ali!
I think changing up the format and adding the discussion concept could work really well, although I can't be sure as they both felt the same about everything this week. It's the live thing that is worrying. If it's just to read viewer twitters then that'll be OK, if pointless.
Mm, maybe I'll stick to The Ape for my film fix then. It seems Film has gradually dumbed down over the years like most other shows. Even though I found his views a bit conservative, a bit 'Halliwells', Barry Norman was fairly eloquent. Ross was a step in the wrong direction. Channel 5 show biz slot style is a new low. At least the real thing's got Tasmin Lucia Khan to look at. Or it would do if I watched it, which obviously I don't. Ahem.
ReplyDeleteThe majority of the show isn't Studio Five really, just the live interview this first episode. That was a car crash. The actual reviews will probably be less safe this time as there's a proper critic reviewing the movies and Winkleman for the norms. It's just the 3 things they reviewed this week were the excellent Social Network, the solidly reviewed across the board Despicable Me and the abominable looking Vampires Suck so they both thought pretty much the same. It's when there's disagreement I'll properly judge it.
ReplyDeleteRoss was OK, but never really a critic. He knew enough about what he was talking about and was a good reviewer for normal folk, but lacked some bite. Had they gone with Kermode he's too far the opposite way. He has no concept of normal people and is fairly insulting.
Bloody normal people ;-) Why are we always pandering to them?
ReplyDeleteI think mainly because most people are "normal" and if you're making a broad film news/review show you want to appeal to as large and wide and audience as possible. It doesn't stop them raving about films that aren't for normal people though. I would expect a lot of norms to find The Social Network quite a dull movie; there's no action, violence, twists etc, it's mainly just cracking dialogue for 2 hours, but it got 2 raves. That's not pandering, that's understanding.
ReplyDeleteKermode doesn't understand this and doesn't care to. He is always right (in his own mind), which in itself is always wrong. He is very likely to rip a movie apart because it's big and loud and doesn't require thought, when that's a) exactly what most people want from entertainment and b) that is exactly all this theoretical film is aiming to be. Perspective, that's what he lacks.
If the show is aimed to the masses, but ignores what is aimed at the minority then that would be bad. As of yet Film 2010 hasn't done that and by adding genuine critics to the mix could possibly cover them better and maybe open them up to a wide audience. I don't know yet. I'll let you know what I think after tonight's second episode.