Anghus Houvouras on hype and hyperbole…
Hype is something every film writer constantly struggles with. The perpetual entertainment news cycle gives film fans so much to chew on. There’s a formulaic cycle of hype that happens with every new movie that strokes the cockles of film fans. Some movies come with preordained hype. A new Star Wars or Marvel movie comes with pre-loaded with months of hype.
Last month the Black Panther trailer debuted and within minutes the internet was hit with a flood of energy and enthusiasm that rippled through every social media feed. People seemed thrilled to get their first glimpses of this extremely interesting new corner of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, though about 75% of the posts I saw were focused on the ‘genius’ of using RUN THE JEWELS for the trailer.
A billion dollar studio used a popular song for a trailer? I wouldn’t exactly call that ‘genius’. Using a choral cover of the Bee Gees’ ‘I Started a Joke’ for the first Suicide Squad trailer was genius. Then again, we saw how the final film turned out so maybe exhibiting genius in a trailer isn’t exactly a strong indicator for how the final film turns out.
I’ve written a lot about hype and hyperbole; two things that often raise expectations of a movie to unrealistic levels and ultimately leading to disappointment. For me, anyway. It seems like a majority of film fans are happy with mediocre fare like The Force Awakens and Rogue One. The fact that these movies even exist have earned enough goodwill from fans to justify their enthusiasm. It doesn’t matter how terrible the final product ends up being.
As a critic, you know when you write a bad review for a movie like Rogue One that you’ll be on the receiving end of indignation. There are probably those who get off on this kind of contrariness and enjoy biting their thumb at Star Wars fans. Some people confuse having contradictory opinions with relevance.
Personally, I’m a little bummed when the hype for a movie eludes me. Like everyone else, I go to the movies hoping to be bowled over. When it doesn’t happen, there are moments of self-examination and reflection about exactly why this film that has energized so many of your peers & film fans alike didn’t take you to the same place.
Take Edgar Wright’s Baby Driver. A fun, entertaining, better than average action movie that has lit up the internet with praise like a fireworks laden fourth of July. I’m a fan of Edgar Wright, so hearing these unabashedly positive, downright exuberant reviews had me hyped. I left the theater wondering what exactly about this entertaining yarn had elicited tweets like this.
#BabyDriver is an original, unapologetically fun summer action film. How Edgar Wright saved the action genre: https://t.co/PK7sWKLUHS pic.twitter.com/od765iWmB0
— IndieWire (@IndieWire) July 2, 2017
There’s so much enthusiasm behind Baby Driver. A level of enthusiasm I had for movies like Shaun of the Dead & Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. Movies that I unabashedly loved and understood the hype for. I didn’t feel the same about Baby Driver. It was a good movie. Very well put together. But there were gaping flaws that lingered with me as I pondered what I had just seen.
The most obvious lingering Baby Driver doubt was how much of the movie felt borrowed from Nicolas Winding Refn’s Drive. Right down to the silent, stoic lead character with a trademark jacket. There have been lots of movies made about heist drivers. It’s not like Refn and Gosling invented the genre, though they did stylize it in a way that made it feel fresh. So you have two movies with socially awkward heist drivers done in an incredibly stylistic fashion. While there’s nothing wrong with that, it does take a layer of luster off the word ‘original’ I keep hearing bandied about.
When film fans and film critics get excited about something, hype evolves into hyperbole. Logic and reason become less important hyperbolic sound bytes and tantalizing tweets. To me, Baby Driver isn’t all that original. It skirts the line of originality in the same way Tarantino constructs in his films: a melange of influences and styles carefully orchestrated into something entertaining. They are artists who work with homage & nostalgia like others work with oils or clay. Their choices are deliberate and their attention to both the sound and the vision is obsessive.
This argument is often torpedoed by those who point out that most films are the product of prior influence. That every movie is an amalgam of the visions and stories of others. But I think Wright and Tarantino work in a way that goes beyond typical influence and has evolved into a kind of creative construction that is given a pass as being something fresh and unseen. Just because you can’t see the stitches doesn’t mean you’re looking at a factory original. It’s sure as shit more original that Transformers: The Last Knight or The Mummy, but let’s pump the brakes before we start heralding Baby Driver as a work of complete and total originality. Just because a movie isn’t adapted from previously released material doesn’t make it ‘original’.
There isn’t much of a benefit to admitting your moderate enthusiasm in an online world where everything has to be labeled as a masterpiece or a piece of shit. It’s not enough to call Logan a great film, because some overly enthusiastic fop will scream LOGAN SHOULD BE NOMINATED FOR BEST PICTURE when we’re not even halfway through the year. Film geeks are so desperate for validation of their particular cinematic taste that they will scream bloody murder until a comic book adaptation gets nominated for Best Picture. It no longer becomes about the movie but strange benchmarks of praise and adulation that are utterly meaningless.
Baby Driver was good. Those declaring it an unmitigated masterpiece beyond criticism were probably already circling that opinion before they saw the movie. Having loved every Edgar Wright movie before Baby Driver had me in a similar spot. I was expecting love but all I got was like. There’s nothing wrong with loving a movie, but Baby Driver feels like a product of critical groupthink: A good movie that is getting raves because it’s far more clever and well-executed than crap like The Mummy or Transformers 5.
Even as I write this article, I’m considering the impact a moderate opinion will have. Saying a movie is just ‘pretty good’ when the online film fans are freaking out gets you labeled as a click-bait loving contrarian (Or a Film Grump). You’re the downer in the room who’s merely smiling while everyone else is doing cartwheels and ordaining Edgar Wright a ‘Master of Cinema’. It would almost serve you better to say nothing. Unfortunately, I love talking and writing about movies. While I wasn’t disappointed by Baby Driver, I am baffled by the high level of praise being heaped upon it. Much like the movie it borrowed from, it’s a very entertaining stylish action movie with a awkward protagonist and some good performances. It’s missing that Pegg/Frost spark of ludicrous energy. I’m not saying Pegg and Frost need to be in every single Wright movie, but I missed the manic nature their presence brings to his films.
SEE ALSO: Who are the contemporary Masters of Cinema?
The noise from hype has become all-encompassing. The internet gives vocal fans and ardent detractors a platform to shout their opinions from the virtual mountaintops. I’m an hour or so away from seeing Spider-Man: Homecoming, a movie that is being celebrated and cheered from every corner of the interwebs.
Will it live up to the hype? Is the hype actually doing a disservice by setting ridiculously high expectations?
I’m curious to hear your thoughts.
