You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: VICE - Adam McKay (2018) | Film Review
Not sure I agree with all that, but particularly Hollywood doing politics. It would be different if they didn’t have a need to create charicatures. I pan films all the time for lacking character development. I’m the case of politics, that is generally the case.
I forgot to thank you for the first comment, so consider this thanks for both your original comment and your response to my response to your comment. :)
I think in the case of politicians that the creation of a caricature is especially difficult to avoid because it's difficult to compress a life that may last for fifty, sixty, seventy years into the span of two-ish hours and still achieve the multiferous (is that a word? if it wasn't before, it is now) goals of comprehensibility, narrative, accuracy. In real life, it takes months, years to learn about a person. In film, a specific set of scenes can convey all that information in just a couple minutes. What do you do when the two get married and have a biopic?
I think approaching a biopic with a level of objectivity, knowing your predilections and biases is a good starting point. Knowing you want your characters relate requires an attempt to humanize rather than demonize. Even a good antagonist has likable qualities. In fact, the likable bad guys are the best one. But a biopic should not even be about good guys and bad guys. And that is where films like this so often go off track.
Did you see the film Elvis and Nixon? I thought that film was done well. As hated as Nixon is by the left, that film was humorous and engaging.
I have not, alas. I don't watch too many movies and I go to the theatres even less often. I'll check it out, though, see if it's streaming.