I agree thoroughly with MovieMogul. I will say that, though I thought I would hate this movie, I merely disliked it. I think it is genuinely not good and would give it a C- or so. I can usually put myself in others’ shoes and understand why they like a movie even if I don’t, but in this case, I am flummoxed. Sure, I can understand it winning some people over–it’s not noxious–but the raging popularity, yeah, I don’t get that. BTW, I love musicals, have watched a lot, and some of my favorite movies are musicals. So I was in the demo.
The Good
• I thought the movie looked pretty good, though that’s not the most important thing to me in a film: the direction, camerawork, etc.
• I found the dialog to be well-written and -performed. I had rather watched the characters, you know, just interacting more than all of the music stuff.
• I liked Ryan Gosling’s performance. He seemed really deep into the character. Even though I’ll trash his perspective on jazz in a moment, I liked watching him. Oh, and he wears killer suits throughout the movie.
The Bad
• This is going to sound uncharitable, but I don’t think Emma Stone is either pretty or a good actress. She’s being sold as a leading lady, and I think her perceived cuteness and ability are a big part of the success of this picture, but I don’t buy it. I’m not a huge looks Nazi and I don’t feel good about saying this, but I find her to be quite weird-looking and unappealing. She’s got those huge eyes in that small face, and she looked like she’d been slapped red and raw. She’s also got big, gappy teeth and lips that look like red worms. I would never say this stuff about a character actor, but she’s just forced on us by Hollywood as this It Girl, and for me the contrast between the sales pitch and the reality really grates on me.
• The songs were not good. They were also not terrible, but there was none I’d give a grade higher than a B; most were C’s. They simply lacked hooks and memorable melodies. I see a few people here saying they want the soundtrack, but I have not heard many (any?) critics saying the music was great or citing any songs as standouts. This movie will not be remembered as a classic in 50 years–not even close. The lack of good songs is enough to ensure forgetitude in a few years tops. By the way, the John Legend number in the movie, in terms of both music and style, is terrible.
• The approach to jazz in this movie is stupid. I’ve listened to a lot of jazz and, while I’m not a fan of the genre as a whole (though a big fan of certain musicians, like Herbie Hancock), I have a feel for its history. The director, Chazelle, is apparently a big fan, since both this and Whiplash were about jazz. But he apparently has poor knowledge and iffy taste. The Reynolds character has nothing insightful to say (though what the John Legend character says about innovation is true) and the jazz played in the movie is pretty damn square. It’s fairly safe and sedate jazz as opposed to something really energetic like bebop. In a word, it’s stereotypical jazz, stereotypically described.
• The moods are forced and fake. Pace those who loved the opening number, I found it to be très faux. It seems more like a concept for a really energetic, rousing spectacle instead of one that simply delivered. Jesus, compare that to anything in Busby Berkeley’s 30s movies. Those numbers weren’t trying to be anything; they just were. They were totally fresh, sincere, and most importantly, fucking awesome. Oh, and clever, ingenious, brilliantly choreographed, often subversive. All without being “meta” anything that had come before. That’s the real shit, people! The numbers in LLL were the palest regurgitations of the genuine. And the crap like them dancing in the stars in the planetarium. That could have been OK with better execution and had it been earned in the storytelling, which it was not.
• The story is half-baked. I won’t say it sucks. It’s simple, but I was reasonably interested in the characters. As I said, I wanted more from them, more with them. More of them just being themselves and not shoved onto the Procrustean soundstage. Further, while we get to see Gosling deliver his goods as a character with his performances, we don’t get to see Stone do the same. Why not show some/all of her one-woman show? That sounded more goddamn interesting than the movie we got. But no, it’s left a total blank.
• It really isn’t a musical. The numbers are not balanced and varied as in a “real” musical. The arc just isn’t there. There is no big production number to finish, for example, no show-stopper elsewhere. Stone’s “my aunt jumped in the Seine” number feels like something that belonged early in the story, not at the end. With nothing really to follow it, it’s quite anticlimactic.
• And people have noted that the leads couldn’t sing or dance. They chose to sell (perceived, in Stone’s case) star power instead of choosing people who could really knock it out of the park. And that is something wrong with Hollywood.
• Also as others have noted, the movie had nothing original to say or present, nor did it cleverly reuse old material.
To me, a fan of musicals, it just is very clearly a substandard movie. I do not get the appeal.
