Random Film reviews

Over the weekend I sat down and watched a couple of movies randomly selected from the collection. The first one was due for last weekend but what with going to London and seeing Death Defying Acts I didn't get a chance to watch until this weekend.

I'm not going to spoil it by mentioning what they are (not until the first review pops up tomorrow) but what I'm going to do is give some brief thoughts on the genre that happens to connect these two randomly selected films. The much-maligned BIOPIC.

The biopic has been around as long as cinema, with many early features seeking inspiration from monarchs and world leaders. Although it wasn't long before those lofty targets were shifted to greats in their field including science (the 30's saw an enormous number of invention movies, giving rise to the old joke about Don Ameche inventing the telephone) and entertainment.



This led to the delightfully meta moment in Jolson Sings Again where Larry Parks, playing Al Jolson, meets Larry Parks, playing Larry Parks, to discuss making a biopic about Al Jolson.

The output of biopics has been steadily increasing since the 40's, with the subjects no longer confined to the great and good but are as likely to focus on serial killers, drug dealers and corporate whistle blowers. (And for each of these subjects there's an easily identifiable well made film to go with them.)

It's no surprise that biopics do reasonable box office - it's like receiving gossip over the fence on a gigantic scale. This may also explain why, in this age of celebrity culture, the subjects lifestyles are becoming more lurid and recent. In fact the subjects are often so well known the actors are merely impersonating the parts and not creating the role in a way you would with a character purely from the page. And critics and audiences are lapping this up.

It's been 10 years since none of the acting oscars have gone to a biopic (11 if you count Shakespeare in Love as having real people), and over the last 6 years five leading actresses and four lead actors have been impersonations. I'm not saying these these performances weren't good - in many cases they were deserving - but in just as many cases the mere fact of the closeness of the performance to how we remember the person was sufficient to get the awards.

I'm as culpable as the next man: W., The Argentine, Valkyrie are all on my radar. I hope though that I can see the performances for what they are and not as mere impersonations.