Thank you! Yes, there's a whole strain of film writer/aficionado who insists there's no such thing as spoilers and only rubes watch films to see the STORY unfold. Well, call me a rube then--I loathe being spoiled for a film, to the point that I won't even watch a trailer unless I'm on the fence about seeing something. (It's not just about the plot either--I just don't want to get too much about the film at all.)
Of course there is and should be space for expansive film criticism that looks at the whole picture and if I pick up a book of film essays by, say, Manny Farber, I'm not going to be yelling that he's spoiled me without warning. That's a convention of serious film crit and I'm fine with it. But I will always warn if I'm going to do it myself. And I definitely won't do it if my main purpose is to encourage people to watch a film!
And of course great films are still great even when you know what's going to happen. I mean, I had no illusions about what I was in for when I sat down to watch Bergman's The Virgin Spring. (Yet even here I'm not going to say why because not everybody in the world knows what The Virgin Spring is about.)
Film is more than just the story. But come on, film snobs (of which I can be one)--it's also ok to let people choose how much they want to know ahead of time!
I've yet to see 28 Days Later. I'm in the midst of moving between places and won't be permanently settled for a couple of weeks. It's been on my list, but after that recitation; chills. I also loved, 'Men," as well as, "Ex Machina." I even liked Boyle's film version of, "The Beach," despite it being a mess. Garland seems to evoke a lot of hate it/love it, which, IMHO, is kind of the point with art. Thanks for another great post, inspired to watch 28 Days Later.
I think you'll really like it! And I'm so glad to hear you liked "Men"--we really DO have similar tastes, that was a controversial one. I liked Ex Machina too--really I like everything Garland has done with the exception of the film version of The Beach. I was going to say I should probably give it another chance as I did not like DiCaprio in those days (did not appreciate him until Scorsese started using him in films) but then I thought "nah tbh I almost certainly won't." (Maybe instead I'll go back to the two books he wrote after The Beach, which I never read.) Garland DOES seem to provoke strong reactions, and I think you're right--who cares about art that makes everyone go "yeah it was fine"?
This was a great read. I really appreciate film writing that doesn’t blow the story.
Thank you! Yes, there's a whole strain of film writer/aficionado who insists there's no such thing as spoilers and only rubes watch films to see the STORY unfold. Well, call me a rube then--I loathe being spoiled for a film, to the point that I won't even watch a trailer unless I'm on the fence about seeing something. (It's not just about the plot either--I just don't want to get too much about the film at all.)
Of course there is and should be space for expansive film criticism that looks at the whole picture and if I pick up a book of film essays by, say, Manny Farber, I'm not going to be yelling that he's spoiled me without warning. That's a convention of serious film crit and I'm fine with it. But I will always warn if I'm going to do it myself. And I definitely won't do it if my main purpose is to encourage people to watch a film!
And of course great films are still great even when you know what's going to happen. I mean, I had no illusions about what I was in for when I sat down to watch Bergman's The Virgin Spring. (Yet even here I'm not going to say why because not everybody in the world knows what The Virgin Spring is about.)
Film is more than just the story. But come on, film snobs (of which I can be one)--it's also ok to let people choose how much they want to know ahead of time!
Would you mind if I copied this over to my blog? (With a link to your original post, obvs.)
Sure, go ahead, as long as you link back!
Done! https://cheeseburgergothic.substack.com/p/28-years-four-riffs-one-good-reviewer
Oh, that's a really lovely piece to be linked in--thank you so much!
I've yet to see 28 Days Later. I'm in the midst of moving between places and won't be permanently settled for a couple of weeks. It's been on my list, but after that recitation; chills. I also loved, 'Men," as well as, "Ex Machina." I even liked Boyle's film version of, "The Beach," despite it being a mess. Garland seems to evoke a lot of hate it/love it, which, IMHO, is kind of the point with art. Thanks for another great post, inspired to watch 28 Days Later.
I think you'll really like it! And I'm so glad to hear you liked "Men"--we really DO have similar tastes, that was a controversial one. I liked Ex Machina too--really I like everything Garland has done with the exception of the film version of The Beach. I was going to say I should probably give it another chance as I did not like DiCaprio in those days (did not appreciate him until Scorsese started using him in films) but then I thought "nah tbh I almost certainly won't." (Maybe instead I'll go back to the two books he wrote after The Beach, which I never read.) Garland DOES seem to provoke strong reactions, and I think you're right--who cares about art that makes everyone go "yeah it was fine"?
I look forward to viewing 28 Years Later. Thanks, Lynda
I really loved it! If you enjoy it half as much as I did, I think you'll really like it.
As an American I’d say you are well positioned to define Englishness as opposed to the wider British label. Nice piece. Thanks.
Thanks so much, Peter, that means a lot! I'm always hesitant to claim too much authority in these matters.