Jump to content
Apple Music
question

Why is The Favourite getting so much hype?

Featured Posts

Oriane

I'm waiting to see it to have a complete opinion but it looks like it uses cheap humor tricks, like the girl falling in the mud... And the scenario seems unoriginal. I have been used to better things with Yorgos Lanthimos so I'll give it a shot, maybe the trailer doesn't do it justice.

You popped my heart seems... All my bubble dreams, bubble dreams...

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
CautiousLurker
6 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I don't think you need to be a learned film critic to know if something's good or not. Critics have agendas and some get paid for good reviews, it's a known fact. The public think differently because they're down to earth.

Historical accuracy kinda matters when dealing with such a sensitive subject. Queen Anne apparently had 17 miscarriages - surely the life of such a tragic figure should be dealt with more carefully and respectfully? There is no evidence that she actually had a lesbian relationship either, it's just rumour that has clearly been interjected here to get attention because it's scandalous and woo! lesbians. I thought that GGD of all places would really look down on any movie that exploited such a thing. Documentary or not, if it involves real people, you've got to do it right and portray accurately. I certainly wouldn't like the idea of dying and then someone inaccurately portraying me in a movie years down the line.

I mean, you don't need to be a learned film critic in order to enjoy film, but to say if something is, as you put it rigidly, 'good or not', hell yeah you need to know something about film...

General public is not down to earth (what does that even mean), they just generally don't know much about film, so various nuances of a masterfully created film can be easily overlooked by them - you won't find a lot of people who will have studied things like film language, screenplay structure, cinematography, framing, composition, sound design and so forth, and how different artists untilize those to create meaning and how challenging or effective the result was...

Look, I get that people connect with and like different things, but just because you like something doesn't make it 10/10 best thing ever, and just because you don't like something doesn't make it bad and incompetent - there's plenty to appreciate about The Favourite...

And no, historical accuracy doesn't really matter in films that are even loosely based on real people, sorry to say... First of all, why do you think they handled the portrayal of Queen Anne with disrespect? Second of all, who cares? She doesn't - she's dead... No, you don't owe it to anyone to portray people accurately unless you insist what you're showing is factually true (like in a documentary)... This movie is very obviously not trying to be someone's memoir, nor should it have to be...

Also why is any movie that touches on lesbianism suddenly exploits it? And why is it something that should be frowned upon so much? Have you considered the context within which it exists? Ughhh, not every movie that involves a relationship between two women needs to be about the turmoil and plight of lgbt folk - filmmakers shouldn't have to walk on eggshells if they want to explore those themes, and I for one find it refreshing when a filmmaker treats those subjects as if they were commonplace... 

 

  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
StrawberryBlond
22 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

I’m using Roma as an example. I had not seen it but I didn’t have so many opinions on the movie and actors beforehand because I had not seen it. Seems like you have a lot of thoughts on this movie you have not seen. 

You could have asked without all of the extra opinions. 

“Don’t judge a book by its cover” at play here. 

For what it's worth, I just watched the Roma trailer and it looks good, so already we've found something in common. And that's what trailers are meant to do - provide you with enough of an opinion to know if you want to see it in full or not.

If I didn't state all the extra opinions, people wouldn't be aware of what issues I had with it, have not picked up on issues had I not pointed them out, or even know why I was asking at all.

It's not judging a book by its cover. That would be deciding based on the poster. Judging by the trailer is what most of us do, there's nothing shameful about it. It's more like judging a book by its synopsis, in this case. Again, no shame in that. If you want people to see your movie, you should focus on making your trailer better, as should authors.

22 hours ago, Spock said:

lmao this thread is so funny. "Now, I haven't seen it, so I can't judge" and then we get a dissertation length essay judging the movie on its trailer :rip: Also, using the excuse that "cinema is expensive" when I live in London of all places and can get movie tickets for £5 :rip: the screener also leaked the other day so there are ways of watching it, this thread is so transparent 

The Favourite is amazing and deserves every bit of praise it has been getting. No one said it was a historical movie about Queen Anne's regime, nor has it been advertised as such, it's a black comedy about how miserable human beings are. In fact, Yorgos has been quite upfront during the promo tour about how the movie ISN'T historically accurate and that they never intended it to be. 

It's a really simple straightforward movie with slapstick humor. And your "critiques" (lmao) on the lesbianism in the movie are so wrong and far from the mark it's crazy. If you had seen in, you would know that It's not used for  exploitation or attention. So embarassing 

I'm just explaining my initial misgivings, asking if they're present throughout the movie. Don't know where you're going to get movies for £5 but for me, we're talking £9.50 without discounts. Plus, every movie I go to, it's out the way requiring a journey and I have to go with someone, so I simply can't see the movie of every trailer I see. And I don't watch movies illegally.

If it wasn't meant to be historically accurate, it shouldn't have been based on a real monarch, but completely fictionalised.

21 hours ago, lost in limbo said:

You can't write a rant on a movie you haven't seen and say it doesn't deserve praise and expect to get positive reviews :air: Maybe it's getting praise for the contents of the 120 minutes of movie you didn't watch and you can't understand why because of the 2 minutes of trailer you watched :air: 

It's more a case of saying that I can't see what others are seeing in it so far, so I'm asking those who have seen it. For the record, I have seen the comments of those who did see it from other channels and they were vastly negative, talking about there being too much shouting, not funny humour, the soundtrack giving them a headache, it went on too long, lots of people walking out and everything. The words "dire" and "dreadful" were the most common descriptors of it and even one of the worst ever. I listen to negativity a lot because it normally picks up on stuff that the overly positive never did. Critics on Rotten Tomatoes gave it an average of 8.5/10 with 94% liking it. In shocking comparison, according to PostTrak, the public only gave it an average of 2.5/5 and only 37% would recommend it. If there is this level of complaint (especially the headache thing), I'm genuinely wondering why critics are not picking up on it. Oh, yes, because apparently, at film school, you're taught to believe nothing is bad, you can't call out bad movies for what they are, you can't put down a movie with big names in it and some of them are likely being bribed. To say I don't take critics views as gospel is an understatement. They're guidance, nothing more.

20 hours ago, gag said:

It’s the funniest movie of the year. Its characters are well fleshed out and incredibly well-acted. Lanthimos has been building good will with the industry since The Lobster in 2015 and now there’s a relatively accessible film by him that they’re willing to reward. Next question.

ALSO: it leaked a week ago. You can watch it online if you want to, then maybe your criticism will have substance behind it. :shrug:

I said previously that I don't watch movies illegally and I don't have direct access to streaming services either.

19 hours ago, Didymus said:

It's not. It's a stupid as **** question because the answer is obvious: just watch it.

I do admit I misread that, since that person just asked "were you the same person..." I figured you were just continuing your argument of this thread and not talking about The Wife.

Also, my misreading was based on this bs which runs in sync with it:

"This director is known for his unusual, off the wall ideas (his most famous works before this are The Lobster and The Killing Of A Sacred Deer) that have never won huge praise before" which is a complete fabrication :air:

Stop calling me stupid or order me to do stuff I don't want to.

By "huge praise" I meant it didn't get nominated or win major awards and most of the public didn't go to see these movies (only $18 million and $6 million grosses respectively) and know nothing about them and those who did see them admit his work is polarising.

19 hours ago, Ziggy said:

A spoiler-laden trailer is a very recent trend in the industry and definitely not the historical norm. Trailers are honestly their own industry and shouldn’t be regarded *too* much about the quality of a movie. Suicide Squad is a great example of how different they can be.

I saw Suicide Squad and thought it was just as I imagined from its trailer so I don't know what you mean. I don't know who was expecting it to be some deep, mature delve into superhero psyche, it was clearly just meant to be a fun romp. The only movie that I remember actually being not what I expected based on its trailer is probably Brave. Other than that, I can't say I ever felt like I signed up for something different than what the trailer provided.

19 hours ago, Didymus said:

Since I did misread some stuff, I will respond to this comment :sweat::air:

The "he wasn't acclaimed" argument is rubbish. You're talking about his first local low budget projects for which we don't even have accurate info. His first big release was Dogtooth and he actually did receive instant acclaim for his directing style, and has ever since, consistently :shrug:

Again, wrong about him only making a name now. He made a name with The Lobster which was before Killing of a Sacred Deer, and the latter film had a huge online following, and it competed for the Palme d'Or and won the prestigious screenplay award at CANNES :rip: Again, nothing obscure about it.

About the subjective thing, don't agree. It's just obvious from first glance that the highest grossing films right now are the least original and the most prepackaged in terms of screenplay. Casual audiences don't care about quality of directing, cinematography, editing,... they just want a good absorbing story. Critics (good ones, anyway) and film fanatics have the finesse to recognize superior technique and originality, that's just how it is. I also wouldn't trust a local DJ to be able to appreciate a Beethoven manuscript :ohwell:

For some things you simply need dedicated study and a lot of experience that pushes beyond the typical. Like having gone to McDonald's all your life thinking the Big Mag is the best thing out there and then discovering the far more complex but refined gourmet restaurants. You might think what the hell at first, but for the people who have a passion for flavor, texture and presentation, it's worth the hassle of dissecting it for a solid review. Nothing wrong with the people who still want McDonald's, but they're not the ones who get to say that all gourmet restaurants are overrated :smh:

I replied to you above about what I meant regarding wide praise, so just refer to that.

Just because something's original doesn't make it good. I actually find that casual audience are aware of good quality technicalities seeing as they are very quick to voice displeasure if they feel the movie has failed at any of these categories as it can impede your enjoyment of the film. Of course you'll notice bad cuts, odd directorial decisions, pointless weird moments, all round awkwardness. I've found that the public has a good eye for these things whereas critics seem to mindlessly praise. See the rant I made a few quotes above about how they seem to think that no movie deserves to be slammed. This is why I trust the public ever and always when it comes to reviews. And why couldn't a DJ appreciate a Beethoven manuscript? That's rather snobbish to believe that only "experts" (who can have bias to bear) should be trusted in the subjective area of the arts, which is all about what moves the individual and isn't based on solid facts.

As I just said, I don't think judging the arts requires university degrees or expensive tuition, it's all about feeling it in your soul. If you want to go with the burger analogy, it's sometimes like the restaurant owners don't realise that most of the public don't want pink bits in rare burger meat or fancy, unnecessary stuff piled on their food, so gourmet doesn't translate as high quality for everyone. It's well known that extravagant food struggles to sell because most people prefer simple food they can rely on. Extravagant food is a niche market and always will be for that reason. Movies are no different. Most of the public don't want something odd and awkward that they can't understand, they want a movie that they can feel relaxed with that deals with emotions in ways they can relate to. It doesn't make them unintelligent, it can actually make them far more insightful because they're treating art the way it should be - emotion, not technicality.

19 hours ago, Oriane said:

I'm waiting to see it to have a complete opinion but it looks like it uses cheap humor tricks, like the girl falling in the mud...

Glad to see someone else thinks so. Attending an audition covered in mud is one of the oldest forms of humour in the world. I've seen it done countless times and done way better than this.

16 hours ago, CautiousLurker said:

I mean, you don't need to be a learned film critic in order to enjoy film, but to say if something is, as you put it rigidly, 'good or not', hell yeah you need to know something about film...

General public is not down to earth (what does that even mean), they just generally don't know much about film, so various nuances of a masterfully created film can be easily overlooked by them - you won't find a lot of people who will have studied things like film language, screenplay structure, cinematography, framing, composition, sound design and so forth, and how different artists untilize those to create meaning and how challenging or effective the result was...

Look, I get that people connect with and like different things, but just because you like something doesn't make it 10/10 best thing ever, and just because you don't like something doesn't make it bad and incompetent - there's plenty to appreciate about The Favourite...

And no, historical accuracy doesn't really matter in films that are even loosely based on real people, sorry to say... First of all, why do you think they handled the portrayal of Queen Anne with disrespect? Second of all, who cares? She doesn't - she's dead... No, you don't owe it to anyone to portray people accurately unless you insist what you're showing is factually true (like in a documentary)... This movie is very obviously not trying to be someone's memoir, nor should it have to be...

Also why is any movie that touches on lesbianism suddenly exploits it? And why is it something that should be frowned upon so much? Have you considered the context within which it exists? Ughhh, not every movie that involves a relationship between two women needs to be about the turmoil and plight of lgbt folk - filmmakers shouldn't have to walk on eggshells if they want to explore those themes, and I for one find it refreshing when a filmmaker treats those subjects as if they were commonplace...

Can't you not learn about film without pursuing a degree, though? I've studied plenty of things without doing that.

By "down to earth," I mean they aren't pretentious, they won't say something's good just because it's made by someone obscure and is something different to what we've seen before. Critics, however, seem to be taught to do this and is the prime reason why a lot of the public don't take critics seriously. If you look through the replies I've made previously, I go on a rant about how critics frequently don't pick up on issues that the public can. Maybe it's because they're seeing these movies for free and the public are annoyed when they feel short-changed but I've seen far more indepth reviews and analysis of problems within a movie from amateurs than I've seen from professionals. This is true across the board as well, especially in music reviewing. I've been doing amateur reviews since 2012 and it shocks me how critics who are trained in music are praising stuff that is clearly, technically terrible and not praising stuff that is clearly, technically brilliant (not to mention failure to pick up on stolen art, cliche lyrics and bad vocal technique). Which is why I always find it delicious when the public prove them wrong and make the album a success and the critics fall over themselves to heap praise on the follow-up because they don't want to look like fools. Very few stand firm with their opinion on an artist when the public don't agree, they will follow. They're all fake sheep.

Wikipedia state that many of the themes and major elements in the film were "either purely fictional or highly speculative" especially the lesbian affair. I just believe in treating real people, living or dead, with the highest respect when making a film about them and making it as realistic as possible is of the highest importance. I don't get the fascination with wanting to take historical characters and mould them to suit your vision, a la Phillipa Gregory. It's pure arrogance. If you want to tell a fictional story, create a fictional character, don't pin fictional events onto a real person.

I didn't say that any movie that touches on lesbianism is exploiting it. I said a lot do, however. They include it to induce scandal and titillation, two things which lesbianism is always associated with instead of being treated like a full-time sexual orientation that's worthy of as much understanding and respect as heterosexuality. Classic to put it into a situation in which lesbianism was never proven either, so obvious a man made this. It's hardly treated as if its commonplace here, utilising it in this way only sexualises the orientation and makes it appear unusual and naughty. Treating it as if it's commonplace would be having a lesbian relationship that's never referred to or commented on in any way.

  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Benji

I watched it yesterday and it was fantastic.  It deserves all of the praise it has been receiving.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
djBuffoon

I thought it was really interesting and hilarious. But you'd have to watch the movie to see for yourself :lolga:

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dominic

I died when she said "They were all staring, i can tell even though i cant see - and i heard the word fat" 😂😂 The trailer made me laugh, I will have to add this to my watch list. 

The hardest thing in this world is to live in it

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
T E A

this must be a joke. :selena: anyway, i like his films very much. i suggest you watch either the lobster or the killing of a sacred dear because you're blinded and just looking for splitting (pubic) hair. yes, those are inside jokes that you won't get without actually seeing the movies. :trollga:

lavender
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Morphine Prince

So I saw it and it was fantastic. 

It deserves the praise it’s getting. 

I chuckled so many times throughout. Loved it. 

I got two red pills to take the blues away.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×