Atonement?...I think not.

Atonement. I was guessing that this was going to be a "high brow" chick film and I was not disappointed. I am not saying this is a bad thing but rather one knows a chick film when one sees a chick film. I want to state for the record that chick films are in and of themselves a film genre. Chick films as genre films should be as routinely shunned by the academy as any other genre of film. If that was only so.. but no! It seems that we are routinely told that this year's model is a genre crossing "great" film and deserves to be considered the best film of the years. Critics start to drool in their slavish (not a mis-spelling and not a reference to Slavic culture) praise. There is so little original thought amongst critics that I wonder why I bother paying attention...oh, I don't. This does not just apply to this year's chick flick but rather all the entertaining but unworthy films that have graced the best picture category of both the academy and the drollness of critics best of the year lists (should be less..okay I thought it was funny). Do I need to give you an example ? Okay then: Titanic (chick flick of the year and not even a good chick flick) ;Forrest Gump (entertaining sure but best film, no, I think not)....; etc, etc,.... . I could go on but I suspect I am beginning to insult your favorite films and by extension you. I do not mean to say that I am opposed to insulting you but rather do it face to face rather then the new "online" way (which takes me on a different rant outside the parameters of this blog). How often have you been disappointed because critical reviews steered you towards some supposed "great" film , only to have it turn out to be just an entertaining film. There is no original thought amongst us movie goers as well though I am trying hard to joust all the windmills.

Where was I? Atonement. The look of the film was great and I truly appreciated both the cinematography and art direction. The acting was superb. The story was fine but nothing greater. One leaves the film and it is simply over. There is no lingering mental residue. There is nothing to discuss amongst ourselves. We leave and wonder what we are going to see next. This brings up an interesting question: Do chick flicks ever leave any kind of lingering thought or are they always over when the film is over simply by definition? Okay. I saw Atonement. I like it. Now what. I have to note that the supposed erotic moment was far from it. A side here: The theatre was freezing cold and I ate all the drink's ice before the movie was a third over. I am telling you not to do this. Stay away from ice in a cold theatre.

You want movies that engage conversation? Well the two movies that we saw prior to Atonement did just that. Spend your money and see both The Orphanage and Cloverfield (perhaps I will quit calling it Cloverdale). There was at least things to think about and discuss after both films. I was thinking stuff over as we drank our slushos.

Simply: Any film that is best picture material should leave a lasting mental picture. There should be things that you want to discuss and ponder. The academy should not be such frakking snobs and consider more genre films for best film (genre directors need to quit slumming and produce great work for this to happen). I know that I wish for the impossible but then again I think I am slaying dragons.