Big and bad... The Da Vinci Code was a box office smash despite lukewarm reviews
A few years ago, I was among a few guests on a live television programme aimed at children. We were asked which of the current films we would recommend to the young viewers. The others in the studio predictably suggested the usual blockbusters that were on at the time; Spider-man 2, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, etc. I decided to recommend The Story of the Weeping Camel.
Immediately I could see the eyes of the presenters glazing over. I had had the gall to recommend a Mongolian film with subtitles to children. One presenter, with a forced grin, swiftly moved back to the others, almost cutting me off in mid-sentence. There is no doubt in my mind that most kids who could read would have greatly enjoyed The Story of the Weeping Camel if given the chance. The problem is that very few were given the chance.
Adults, too, inevitably influenced by the overwhelming publicity for certain movies, are also limited in their choices. It is a grim truth that most people don't choose films, most films choose people.
Little of this is helped by the quality newspapers. For example, a film critic will lead with any big new Hollywood movie, regardless of quality, instead of a smaller, better, more often foreign, film. How many times has one read at the end of a reviewer's column, "but the best film of the week was..." followed by a couple of sentences on, say, a new Iranian film or a re-release of some cinematic masterpiece? It is precisely these films that need the good reviews and as much publicity as they can get.
Some time ago a distinguished critic on one of the British quality dailies was sacked because he led his column with some excellent foreign film rather than the latest Steven Spielberg, or somesuch. The majority of blockbusters are critic-proof. Witness The Da Vinci Code, which was universally panned, but was the fourth biggest box-office earner last year. Last week, all the critics on the qualities led their columns with Babel. Most of the reviews were more negative than positive, yet the film was given far more space than any other. It is the space that is given rather than the opinions expressed that effect the film's box-office ratings.
Ideally, film critics should lead public opinion rather than follow it. Unfortunately, most criticism in this country is primarily descriptive, anecdotal and subjectively evaluative rather than analytical. In the next month or so a few films of real quality will be released (in London, at least) among the dross but none of them will get an iota of the exposure of Dreamgirls, Gridiron Gang or Dirty Dancing. Yet if I say that I heartily recommend Nuri Bilge Ceylan's Climates, Abderrahmane's Bamako, Alain Resnais' Private Fears and Public Places and the re-release of Luis Buñuel's devastating Los Olvidados - not to mention the many equally good films which won't be seen here - I can see your eyes glazing over. Oh, well, back to the hype...
