Image via WikipediaI'm done with movie reviews that feel the need to state/complain that a film "doesn't break new ground." How many films have you ever seen that actually "break new ground?" For that matter, when was the last time an Oscar-winning film was truly and unequivocally "ground breaking?" What ground is there even left to break? Critics who feel the need to state that no "new ground" has been "broken" are just grasping for a way to either knock a film they didn't like but can't effectively trash, or apologize for a positive review of a film that isn't quite up to art-house film-snob standards. You want to "break new ground?" Try reviewing a film on its own merits without trying to size up its overall importance when measured against the history of cinematic expression. A film isn't any less effective or entertaining just because it doesn't transcend modern cinematic principles or push the envelope on narrative structures. Let's leave this arrogant phrase on the heap with "Popcorn Movie" and "Guilty Pleasure."
For those of you eager to see what cinematic travesties the studios would like you to experience in all of their wonderful widescreen high definition glory, you need look no further than the following January 12 releases:
Cliffhanger (1993), Sylvester Stallone, John Lithgow- The big-budget action-adventure box-office failure that Stallone will never live down, featuring John Lithgow as the bad guy sporting a greasy hairpiece that he will never live down. Then again, it isn't half as bad as Oscar. While everyone has their own favorite Cliffhanger moment, mine would have to be the Stallone Impale-Bad-Guy-On-Stalactite-Weightlifting-Move. Extra points for still managing to squeeze numerous bare-armed flexing moments into a film in a frigid arctic setting.
Last Action Hero (1993), Arnold Schwarzenegger, F. Murray Abraham - The big-budget action-adventure box-office failure that Schwarzenegger never truly got enough flack for, although it is easy to see how it could be eclipsed by Cliffhanger, which was released in the same year. Then again, it isn't half as bad as Junior. There's nothing better than an action film that spends most of its time reminding its audience how stupid action films are, and by association, they are.
Fame (2009), Kay Panabaker - Not as much a remake of the original 1980 film of the same name as it is a bizarre attempt at making a slightly more adult High School Musical. For those who like to see Academy Award winning musicals updated to include self-conscious references to YouTube and Reality Talent Television Shows, this is your dream come true. This also happens to be the "Extended Dance Edition", so this should hopefully hold you over until the 3D Step Up sequel comes out in the theaters this year. And no, I'm not kidding about that. Now if we can only get a modernized update of A Chorus Line with Simon Cowell as the producer. Oh, and in 3D.
Image via WikipediaI'm done with movie reviews that feel the need to state/complain that a film "doesn't break new ground." How many films have you ever seen that actually "break new ground?" For that matter, when was the last time an Oscar-winning film was truly and unequivocally "ground breaking?" What ground is there even left to break? Critics who feel the need to state that no "new ground" has been "broken" are just grasping for a way to either knock a film they didn't like but can't effectively trash, or apologize for a positive review of a film that isn't quite up to art-house film-snob standards. You want to "break new ground?" Try reviewing a film on its own merits without trying to size up its overall importance when measured against the history of cinematic expression. A film isn't any less effective or entertaining just because it doesn't transcend modern cinematic principles or push the envelope on narrative structures. Let's leave this arrogant phrase on the heap with "Popcorn Movie" and "Guilty Pleasure."
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=d9724b07-1159-4da5-a9ca-ba887e274523)
