03-23-2015, 04:29 PM
Birdman (2014)
Ultimately it didn't hold my interest. What was it about in the end? Stage vs screen? Art vs. the business of entertainment? These are clichéd topics and the film doesn't even really offer anything new on the subject. It also doesn't seem to trust itself to convey this through the action on the screen. The theatre critic seemed to be almost entirely there to explain what the movie is about to the audience. The single long take format was impressive, but more distracting than narrative compelling. There doesn't seem to be much point to it other than perhaps to lend some of the staging challenges of theatre to the film. Contrast this with Touch of Evil or Children of Men where the long takes were essential in creating tension. Both also feel natural and unforced to the point where they could easily go unnoticed. In short, they add to film whereas I felt Birdman's structure ultimately detracted. The performances were all top notch, but I still found the characters rather two dimensional. Perhaps again that's the point. The fact that so much of the on-screen character relies on the audience's knowledge of the actor's off screen history also felt gimmicky to me. I guess ultimately I may have been kinder to this film if I had seen it before the hype. It wasn't a bad film, but it wasn't great either.
6/10
Ultimately it didn't hold my interest. What was it about in the end? Stage vs screen? Art vs. the business of entertainment? These are clichéd topics and the film doesn't even really offer anything new on the subject. It also doesn't seem to trust itself to convey this through the action on the screen. The theatre critic seemed to be almost entirely there to explain what the movie is about to the audience. The single long take format was impressive, but more distracting than narrative compelling. There doesn't seem to be much point to it other than perhaps to lend some of the staging challenges of theatre to the film. Contrast this with Touch of Evil or Children of Men where the long takes were essential in creating tension. Both also feel natural and unforced to the point where they could easily go unnoticed. In short, they add to film whereas I felt Birdman's structure ultimately detracted. The performances were all top notch, but I still found the characters rather two dimensional. Perhaps again that's the point. The fact that so much of the on-screen character relies on the audience's knowledge of the actor's off screen history also felt gimmicky to me. I guess ultimately I may have been kinder to this film if I had seen it before the hype. It wasn't a bad film, but it wasn't great either.
6/10
![[+]](https://forums.fanedit.org/images/focus/collapse_collapsed.png)