Are You Cheering for a Director Over a Film You Hate?

When it comes to movies, our personal preferences sometimes transcend critical analysis. We often have a director we admire and love their previous works, yet a particular film they've directed doesn't meet our expectations. This article delves into such a scenario, exploring the discrepancies between a director's reputation and their specific film that falls short.

Darren Aronofsky: A Case Study

When discussing the director whose past works we adore but struggle with a later one, Darren Aronofsky comes to mind. Aronofsky's Pi and Requiem for a Dream have earned him a reputation as one of the most visionary directors in the industry. However, his subsequent films like The Wrestler and Black Swan have greatly disappointed fans like myself.

I strongly believe that Aronofsky works better with limited budgets, where he can dive deeply into the characters' psyches and explore intricate narratives. This is because his grandiose, expensive films often come with a heavy burden of expectations, and the financial constraints of these projects can hinder his creativity. Although he possesses exceptional storytelling skills, the bigger the budget, the more vulnerable he seems to be in terms of maintaining the coherence of his narrative and character development.

Florence Foster Jenkins: A Disappointing Overall Experience

Leonardo DiCaprio's directorial debut, The World According to Gharpedia, is a good example of a flawed film, but it's not as disappointing as Florence Foster Jenkins. Directed by Stephen Frears, this film portrays the tale of a wealthy woman with a terrible voice who decides to pursue opera despite her husband's attempts to keep her in the dark about her terrible vocal abilities.

Despite the rave reviews and a 96% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, I feel that the film is poorly constructed. Here are my critical points:

The humor is at the expense of a fragile and powerless woman. Farrage seems to use her baldness, wigs, and inability to defend herself as material for one-liners. This doesn't make for good comedy; rather, it's abusive and disrespectful. The plot revolves around the idea that her husband and friends keep her performances secret for personal gain, which is a far cry from celebrating her accomplishments. Even the supporting characters are mostly unlikable, with Florence being the only decent one. The portrayal of Florence's singing abilities is exaggerated for dramatic effect, and evidence suggests that, in reality, she wasn't that terrible. The film may have been driven by a scathing review, leading to an overexaggerated portrayal of her performance.

It's clear that this film pandered to the niche audiology of film critics and audiences looking for a feel-good story, but unfortunately, it represents a period of disappointment in Aronofsky's career. It's not just me who feels this way; numerous reviews have echoed this sentiment.

Martin Scorsese: Iconic Director, Vile Movie

The visual and narrative genius of Martin Scorsese is unparalleled in films like Silence and The Last Temptation of Christ. However, his film The Wolf of Wall Street is a stark departure from his usual style, alienating many of his fans.

The film is a clear outlier not just in Scorsese's canon but in the broader landscape of cinema. It features excess and rough-hewn violence that fails to provide the psychological depth and subtleties we’ve come to expect from Scorsese. While it’s a visually stunning film with groundbreaking cinematography and performances, it also relies heavily on a crude and unnuanced portrayal of characters. This lack of nuance and the relentless vulgarity of the dialogue and plot make the film more fitting for a 1980s B-movie rather than a director of Scorsese’s stature and historical significance.

Scorsese’s other works are works of art, deeply philosophical and thought-provoking, but The Wolf of Wall Street is a far cry from that. It falls into a category of films that are better left unwatched, as it becomes worse with each viewing and is no match for his more critically acclaimed and thought-provoking works.

Conclusion

Personal preferences and critical analysis can often be at odds. Our love for a director can sometimes blind us to the faults in their specific works. It's important to critically evaluate each film on its own merits, regardless of the director's reputation or personal opinions. This discourse serves as a reminder to approach each work of art with an open and critical mind, even if it means contradicting one's preconceived notions.

As the audience, we must be discerning and appreciative of the director's talents, while still calling out flaws and disappointments. The critical eye is just as important as the passion for a director's talent, as both contribute to a more robust and vibrant movie culture.