Part of my expectation was tainted by my dislike of Madonna. It’s a weird thing to dislike a celebrity because you don’t know them, your impression is formed strictly by the media. Nonetheless, I think she’s a demanding, self-serving wannabe with questionable talents. She doesn’t let people get in her way and seems to use others to get ahead. You can say this is no different from the behavior of successful men which we accept - and women often use this argument to defend the unlikable behavior of successful women - but that assumes a lot about me. I don’t like or accept this behavior in anyone, woman or man. To be self-serving at the expense of others is not, to me, an attractive or acceptable way for someone to behave.
Madonna was most recently married to the British film director Guy Ritchie and in 2003 they collaborated on the very un-Guy Ritchie movie “Swept Away.” He wrote and directed it, she starred in it. It was a huge bomb with a %5 Rotten Tomato score. (Just before the movie opened, I remember seeing Ritchie and Madonna on a Red Carpet somewhere. When asked how “Swept Away” was, Ritchie said, “It’s horrible.” Madonna elbowed him and laughed and said he was kidding, but it didn’t look to me like he was kidding.) The impression is that Madonna used her husband to further her own career.
Of the 78 reviews for “Swept Away” on Rotten Tomatoes, only four gave it a favorable rating. Of those who liked it, one admits to it having a “ghastly” start, one predicted it will become a camp classic, one gave backhanded kudos to Madonna saying it shows she “doesn’t suck” as an actress, and the other’s review is no longer active on the site.
Melanie was curious to see "W.E." and I like historical dramas, so I was mildly interested too. The film tells two parallel stories. One is about Wallis Simpson’s affair and marriage to King Edward VIII who abdicated his throne for her, and the other is of a woman in 1998 who’s fascinated with the Simpson story and sees similarities in her own life.
The line in the film that sounds like pure Madonna to me (I’m paraphrasing from memory) is, “Everyone talks about how much he gave up by marrying her, but no one ever talks about what she gave up.”
That’s right, Wallis Simpson is the one we should all feel sorry for, no one appreciates what women go through. Bitch, please. What did Simpson give up? She was a married woman who had an affair with a would-be king and divorced her (from all accounts) decent, loving and non-abusive husband for him. She was then ostracized by Britain and the royal family. So what did she give up exactly?
Now here’s the surprise; "W.E." isn't half bad. Well, maybe it is half bad, but it's only half bad. The critics gave it a %12 approval rating but the audience rated it %51.
The direction is deftly handled (it's not easy for me to say that) and I like the intercutting between the two story lines. Sometimes the film switches back and forth quickly without warning, but you never get lost. I think the acting is great (Madonna’s not in it) and the production and costumes especially are very well done. The script is a little weak and one-note. The modern story isn’t well resolved and might not be needed at all, despite the good acting. It’s not bad, just doesn't seem to go anywhere. And you never understand why the modern woman is so fascinated by Simpson and Edward. So the script could definitely be better. But I think the main reason the critics didn't give the movie a better reception has more to do with Madonna than the movie itself. That’s unfortunate because the film, though only OK, is better than Madonna’s being given credit for. I enjoyed it; not a lot, but I enjoyed it, and it did make me want to know more about the real story of Wallis Simpson and King Edward.
Maybe the only reason I liked the movie at all is because my expectations were so low. But I don’t think so. It’s still obvious why Madonna chose to do it – a female-directed female-centric movie starring two women depicting the struggles of strong women – but the movie works more than it doesn’t. Interesting.
(I'd love to hear from you. Feel free to comment.)
No comments:
Post a Comment