Like 'Get Out' - this film shows how easy it is to succumb to the power of suggestion.
Let me preface my review by saying this: I am not cynical. I NEVER say that a film is overrated. I never watch a film and say "I hated that"; If I don't like a film after I watch it for the first time - I simply say that I need to watch it again; Most of my favorite films are ones that I didn't "get" the first (or second or third) time I watched them. I think that always keeping an open mind, allows you to like so many more films/works of Art, because you never have it in your mind that you don't like something, so you're always giving things another chance. I also never say that a film is bad or overrated-simply because I think it's extremely arrogant to assume that: If I didn't "get" the film ... that means that nobody else did... So, for me to say a film is overrated or "bad" - is *extremely* rare. That has happened no more than 2 or 3 times in my life; In fact, the only time I remember thinking a film (OR album) was "bad" or overrated ... was "Get Out".
So-Please take those things into consideration when you read the rest of this...
As I was watching Birds of Passage - I was *literally in shock* - that a film with such overwhelmingly positive reviews ... could be SO bad. It was actually surreal. I kept waiting for things to change-Where I thought that I was just missing "something", or that I was not in the mood or being cynical, or that there would be some kind of way that all of the things that seemed bad about the film-would somehow be resolved... That never happened. The longer the film went on ... the WORSE it got.
I don't even know where to start, so I guess I'll start with the most blatant problem with Birds Of Passage... The plot of this film is *LITERALLY* a 'mix and match' of the EXACT same plot points-from all of the other drug dealer films/shows; Traffic, Blow, Breaking Bad, Scarface, etc. It's seriously like a greatest hits compilation-being put out as a new album.
What's worse is that the plot points make absolutely no sense, within the context of the characters.
It is the exact definition of "expediency"-Where, it's like every plot point is included for the sole purpose of just getting to the next part of the story. Things would just "happen". There were multiple times where I was watching a "pivotal scene" and thinking "Where did this come from? "Why would he do that?"... I know that sounds like I'm exaggerating but I swear to you, I'm not.
Imagine if: In The Dark Knight ... Batman just started robbing banks in the second act of the movie... THAT is what it seemed like was happening in Birds Of Passage.
The film just runs through plot points. It truly seems like the screenplay was made by: cutting and pasting other "drug dealer movie" plot points ... Then, writing a *cliff notes version* of that - Then, using THAT as the script.
So, the plot is a compilation of the exact same plot points in a million other movies, AND none of the plot points make sense.... AND on top of all that, you develop no connection, to ANY of the characters. Absolutely None.
By the third act, you still don't have any reason to feel emotionally invested in what happens, to anyone.
I feel like I've seen "that" kind of critique in a lot of reviews before-but I've always thought that it seemed like it was just a bunch of words, because I've never really experienced that from a film.
Now, I know exactly what they mean when they say that. I don't even know how to explain it; I just felt like I did not know anything-about any of the characters, and that I didn't connect with any of them, on any level.
Next, although it wasn't like the acting, in its entirety-was awful ... But there were definitely moments where I thought the acting seemed pretty bad.
I don't know how else to explain-how "surreal" it was to watch this film. I just kept thinking "is this really happening? Is this movie actually THIS BAD? What am I missing? Something has to change. How is this movie so bad? ..."
The only thing this movie has going for it-is the cinematography. Visually, it's absolutely BEAUTIFUL.
I actually think that the cinematography *may* have tricked people into thinking that the film was good; You wouldn't expect a film that is shot so well-to be so bad.
Aside from that, the only possible explanation that I can think of, for "how" this film got the kind of praise that it got ... is from some kind of "political-esque bias", or something like that; Like, maybe because the film is foreign, or that it has a female co-director and writer ... although, I think that the praise for Get Out-was 1000% because of "that kind of thing" ... I feel like that bias for this film seems like a bit of a stretch... But I seriously cannot fathom how any critic could say anything positive about the movie, unless they had SOME kind of bias, that would make them do so.
It's seriously THAT bad.
Let me end by saying this: I do not like that I am writing a bad review for a piece of art, I HATE "hating on art".
I would MUCH rather prefer "praising art".
However, the "hype" and bias surrounding art, especially in film, has gotten out of hand-to the point of absurdity.
A film does not deserve to be praised-simply because 'it is praised'. A film does not deserve to be praised simply because it has a certain political or ideological stance that is consistent with the critic's political/ideological beliefs.
These kinds of things are destroying art.
If something is good - it is good.
If it is bad - it is bad.
End of story.
That is how it should be.
Let me preface my review by saying this: I am not cynical. I NEVER say that a film is overrated. I never watch a film and say "I hated that"; If I don't like a film after I watch it for the first time - I simply say that I need to watch it again; Most of my favorite films are ones that I didn't "get" the first (or second or third) time I watched them. I think that always keeping an open mind, allows you to like so many more films/works of Art, because you never have it in your mind that you don't like something, so you're always giving things another chance. I also never say that a film is bad or overrated-simply because I think it's extremely arrogant to assume that: If I didn't "get" the film ... that means that nobody else did... So, for me to say a film is overrated or "bad" - is *extremely* rare. That has happened no more than 2 or 3 times in my life; In fact, the only time I remember thinking a film (OR album) was "bad" or overrated ... was "Get Out".
So-Please take those things into consideration when you read the rest of this...
As I was watching Birds of Passage - I was *literally in shock* - that a film with such overwhelmingly positive reviews ... could be SO bad. It was actually surreal. I kept waiting for things to change-Where I thought that I was just missing "something", or that I was not in the mood or being cynical, or that there would be some kind of way that all of the things that seemed bad about the film-would somehow be resolved... That never happened. The longer the film went on ... the WORSE it got.
I don't even know where to start, so I guess I'll start with the most blatant problem with Birds Of Passage... The plot of this film is *LITERALLY* a 'mix and match' of the EXACT same plot points-from all of the other drug dealer films/shows; Traffic, Blow, Breaking Bad, Scarface, etc. It's seriously like a greatest hits compilation-being put out as a new album.
What's worse is that the plot points make absolutely no sense, within the context of the characters.
It is the exact definition of "expediency"-Where, it's like every plot point is included for the sole purpose of just getting to the next part of the story. Things would just "happen". There were multiple times where I was watching a "pivotal scene" and thinking "Where did this come from? "Why would he do that?"... I know that sounds like I'm exaggerating but I swear to you, I'm not.
Imagine if: In The Dark Knight ... Batman just started robbing banks in the second act of the movie... THAT is what it seemed like was happening in Birds Of Passage.
The film just runs through plot points. It truly seems like the screenplay was made by: cutting and pasting other "drug dealer movie" plot points ... Then, writing a *cliff notes version* of that - Then, using THAT as the script.
So, the plot is a compilation of the exact same plot points in a million other movies, AND none of the plot points make sense.... AND on top of all that, you develop no connection, to ANY of the characters. Absolutely None.
By the third act, you still don't have any reason to feel emotionally invested in what happens, to anyone.
I feel like I've seen "that" kind of critique in a lot of reviews before-but I've always thought that it seemed like it was just a bunch of words, because I've never really experienced that from a film.
Now, I know exactly what they mean when they say that. I don't even know how to explain it; I just felt like I did not know anything-about any of the characters, and that I didn't connect with any of them, on any level.
Next, although it wasn't like the acting, in its entirety-was awful ... But there were definitely moments where I thought the acting seemed pretty bad.
I don't know how else to explain-how "surreal" it was to watch this film. I just kept thinking "is this really happening? Is this movie actually THIS BAD? What am I missing? Something has to change. How is this movie so bad? ..."
The only thing this movie has going for it-is the cinematography. Visually, it's absolutely BEAUTIFUL.
I actually think that the cinematography *may* have tricked people into thinking that the film was good; You wouldn't expect a film that is shot so well-to be so bad.
Aside from that, the only possible explanation that I can think of, for "how" this film got the kind of praise that it got ... is from some kind of "political-esque bias", or something like that; Like, maybe because the film is foreign, or that it has a female co-director and writer ... although, I think that the praise for Get Out-was 1000% because of "that kind of thing" ... I feel like that bias for this film seems like a bit of a stretch... But I seriously cannot fathom how any critic could say anything positive about the movie, unless they had SOME kind of bias, that would make them do so.
It's seriously THAT bad.
Let me end by saying this: I do not like that I am writing a bad review for a piece of art, I HATE "hating on art".
I would MUCH rather prefer "praising art".
However, the "hype" and bias surrounding art, especially in film, has gotten out of hand-to the point of absurdity.
A film does not deserve to be praised-simply because 'it is praised'. A film does not deserve to be praised simply because it has a certain political or ideological stance that is consistent with the critic's political/ideological beliefs.
These kinds of things are destroying art.
If something is good - it is good.
If it is bad - it is bad.
End of story.
That is how it should be.