No child should have to grow up alone

Georgie (Campbell) lives alone in a flat on the outskirts of London. Her mother just died from an undescribed disease, and it’s clear that Georgie is still grieving, which is completely understandable. Her estranged father Jason (Harris Dickinson) has been MIA for almost her entire life, so Georgie has no choice but to take care of herself. Instead of attending school, she and her friend Ali (Alin Uzun) spend their time stealing and selling bikes to get cash. Georgie is determined and resourceful as she’s been misleading the social services with the help of a local shop owner, a few audio recordings and an ‘uncle’ named Winston Churchill. Georgie knows this situation is unsustainable. To find some peace, quiet and hope, she goes into a room to lie in front of a scrap pile (hence the title).

One day her life is changed completely when Jason comes leaping through her garden one day. He has heard about what happened to her mother and wants to help Georgie. However, there’s a reason why he hasn’t been part of her life. Jason still hasn’t come to terms with growing up and becoming a father, so how do you expect someone like him to care for a young girl already on the wrong path? Will they be able to reconnect and save themselves?

Stunning performances by the newcomers!

While this plotline about the estranged father-daughter relationship feels very familiar due to Aftersun, released last year, Scrapper still has a lot of uniqueness to offer. The main reason why you should see this movie is the stunning standout performance by newcomer Campbell. During our interview with Regan, she mentioned that she was the perfect Georgie right from the start of Campbell’s audition, and we certainly agree with her. Campbell perfectly balances Georgie’s rough-tough side and her vulnerability, and her comedic timing is top-notch. While she shares the screen with Dickinson, she could have easily carried this film herself through the end.

Dickinson, who’s on a roll after releasing Triangle of Sadness, See How They Run, and Where The Crawdads Sing all last year, is perfect as Jason. He gives his character the mysterious vibe he needs (Georgie initially thought that her father was clearly out for something) but also shows us that no matter how long you’ve been out of each other’s lives, the father-daughter connection is never completely broken. The chemistry between Campbell and Dickinson spat off the screen, making the relationship between Georgie and her father feels very authentic. We also have to congratulate Uzun on his stunning debut performance as the loyal friend who’s certainly not immune to Georgie’s wit and mischief.

Smooth editing and soft cinematography with a few flaws

Visual-wise, Regan uses many different aspects and techniques. She mainly relies on the ‘traditional’ way of filming a drama. Long, emotional scenes that have no background score whatsoever. The main focus is the characters and their feelings. To make sure that the movie doesn’t become monotone, she also decides to include the comedic testimonials of people in Georgie’s life—think of her teacher, school enemies, and social workers – about her grieving process and way of living. Regan also speeds up some scenes for dramatic effects and sometimes swaps the smooth editing for jagged cuts. While those aspects sometimes feel a bit out of place, the overall visuals perfectly fit the storyline. The score mainly consists of hip-hop and rap music, giving this movie that ‘in the hood’ vibe.

A heartbreaking movie about grief, maturation and family

Despite some distracting visual choices, Scrapper stands extremely strong throughout its 84 minutes runtime. The heartbreaking story of grief, maturation, (dis)trust and family comes to life stunningly thanks to the great sense of humour, outstanding performances and excellent chemistry.

Rating: (4 / 5)

Scrapper is screened on the 7th of July during the Sundance Film Festival London and has a nationwide release on the 25th of August.

Also Read: Fry-Up (Directed by Charlotte Regan) | Short Snacks #13

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Review: Scrapper appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

Today we are going to look at a research paper from Jacob Pentheny called The Influence of Movie Reviews on Consumers. In this article, we will break down the paper’s findings, how the study was conducted and what it all means. Firstly though, let’s outline the paper’s goals. 

The Aims

Pentheny’s paper researched how various types of online film criticism can impact the average moviegoer. In particular, the paper focused on research into how reviews informed moviegoers’ decision to see a film in the cinema. As well as the difference between professional critic and consumer reviews in terms of influence. And how a review’s tonal information (positive, negative, and mixed) can sway readers opinions.

The Methods

To conduct this research Pentheny created a survey that began by showing 1 set of 3 randomised critical/consumer reviews that were either good, bad, or mixed (from a pool of 6 sets). The participants were then asked 17 questions about their feelings on the reviews.

Everyone then filled in questions on two different scored ranking scales. The first scale was the Self-Monitoring scale which used its questions to measure how much an individual adjusts their attitudes based on the actions/opinions of the group they are part of. Thereby demonstrating how external forces can impact participants. High scorers were more likely to agree with the majority. Secondly, there was the Need for Cognitive Closure (NFCC) scale. Which measured an individual’s need for a definitive answer (which would score higher) over ambiguity (which would score lower). Therefore helping to showcase participants feelings towards the reviews.

225 people responded to the survey with the major demographics being 18-21-year-olds and 71-80-year-olds.

The Findings

Firstly, the results showed that people with a high NFCC preferred reading consumer reviews and believed consumer reviews benefitted others more than those of critics. This is possibly because they view consumers as being more likely to want definitive answers, like themselves. Additionally, they believed other people would be more inclined to watch a movie after reading consumer reviews. They also valued positive reviewers opinions and trusted positive reviews over negative ones. 

Conversely, people with a lower NFCC score saw all reviews as being of little help. Though critical reviews were slightly more favoured. Similarly, they thought others would find the reviews unhelpful. But consumer reviews were seen as minorly more useful to others. Critical reviews were seen as more likely to encourage others to watch a movie. They also favoured mixed reviews as they showcased more than one way of seeing a film. Despite this, they viewed negative reviews as the most accurate and mixed reviews as the least. Perhaps showing that lower NFCC responders value nuanced analysis but view overall negative reviews as being more honest.

When it came to the Self-Monitoring scale those with a low ranking found consumer reviews more helpful than critical ones. Whereas high scorers found critic’s reviews to be of comparatively greater help. This is odd as high self-monitors would usually be more likely to agree with opinions echoed by the majority. Which the NFCC analysis said was more associated with consumer reviews. Both high and low self-monitors believed others would get more from consumer reviews over critics. Finally, low scorers tended to prefer reviews with positive content and high scorers leant more towards negative writing. 

Conclusion

In summation, it is obvious that reviews can significantly affect whether moviegoers will see a film. But how it impacts people varies wildly depending on how much you value closure and fitting in with the majority.

Overall consumer reviews are valued more by people who require unambiguous information and aren’t concerned with what the majority think. Film critics however play more of an important role with people who don’t need closure. As well as with People who adjust their behaviour within groups.

And while polarised review content is seen as more trustworthy, mixed reviews hold favour for those looking for a more nuanced opinion.

Also Read: Film Critics vs Film Audiences: What Happens When They Don’t Agree?

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post How Much Influence Do Movie Reviews From Film Critics Have On Audiences? appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

Side By Side

Citizen Kane is the story of Charles Foster Kane, a poor child adopted into a rich but loveless family, he achieves great wealth and becomes a titan of the age before inevitably falling into unhappiness – his huge wealth, priceless treasures and pleasure palace providing no contentment. The film is directed by, written by and stars Orson Wells, 25 years old at the time, which I add just to make everyone older than 25 who hasn’t made arguably the greatest film in existence feel sad.

Paddington 2 is the sequel to Paddington, Paddington being a bear from Peru who is adopted by the Brown family. Paddington is the ursine embodiment of kindness, decency and friendship and while occasionally getting into scrapes is a wonderful addition to the Brown family. In Paddington 2 the bear is wrongly imprisoned for stealing a book, the real culprit being a devious actor played by Hugh Grant (I personally think Grant should have played himself instead of the wonderfully named Phoenix Buchanan). Paddington is played by Ben Whishaw and directed by Paul King, previously best known for having directed The Mighty Boosh.

To compare these films seems a somewhat ridiculous task but Citizen Kane is considered an incredibly original and inventive film and is perhaps now the default depiction of the idea that “money doesn’t bring you happiness”. Paddington 2 is a family film that is very funny and very sweet and both Paddington films have been praised for their ideas of acceptance, the importance of family and friendship and doing the right thing.

What The Critics Said

Looking at the reviews collected from Rotten Tomatoes on each of these films and quite frankly some of these reviews are masterpieces in their own right –

Paddington 2 :

“The thing about the Paddington movies is that they are perfect” – Karen Han, Polygon

“Everything that a kids’ movie should be: sweet and adorable and kind, and adults can enjoy it too” – Alonso Duralde, What The Flick

“‘Paddington 2′ is ‘The Godfather Part II’ of Peruvian bear movies, a sequel that surpasses the superb original“. Joe Morgenstern, The Wall Street Journal (presumably after writing this Morgenstern walked off into the sunset knowing he would never write anything better).

Citizen Kane (all of these are of the time of the original release):

“It is daring, different, thrilling and revolutionary, a power play of startling brilliance” – Harold V Cohen, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

“Welles is the most exciting thing that’s happened since sound” – Josephine O’Neill, Daily Telegraph (Australia), we would have to assume O’Neill is referring to the still relatively recent addition of sound of movies, rather than the auditory phenomenon that has existed for billions of years.

“Welles has shown Hollywood how to make movies” – Gilbert Seldes, Esquire Magazine

Of the now infamous of Mae Tinee – “You’ve heard a lot about this picture and I see from the ads that some experts think it “the greatest movie ever made”. I don’t” – Mae Tinee, Chicago Tribune.

Rotten Tomatoes has recently gone through a process of adding old reviews for classic and historic films and Citizen Kane is not the only film to have its rating adjusted in this process.

The Greatest Film Ever Made

As pointless an exercise in trying to work out what is the greatest film ever made the idea of combining critic reviews is as good a method as any but many an eyebrow was raised at the suggestion Paddington 2 was the superior film. Part of this is because Paddington 2 is a film about a talking bear, it’s a family film, or as some would see it, it’s for children. To make a film that would genuinely entertain a whole family is no easy feat and Paddington 2 shouldn’t be looked down upon in that that is its goal.

Brett Goldstein’s brilliant podcast Films To Be Buried With poses a question – what is objectively the greatest film ever made, not your favourite, the greatest. Early on in the podcast, a good explanation was given to perhaps what this meant: if aliens came to Earth with no knowledge of cinema, what film would you show them to exemplify cinema? Citizen Kane could well be the film that would be chosen for such a prestigious task but that does not mean it is the most entertaining, the most moving, the funniest or most exciting. I will perhaps give the final word to Bob Fredericks of the Miami Herald who reviewed Citizen Kane at the time of its release, “I would say it is a great picture but… It is one of those things, like the Pyramids, which are impressive and definitely interesting to have seen, but one can have more fun than looking at the Pyramids.“

Also Read: 30 Years On: The Godfather (Part 3)

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Rotten Tomatoes: Citizen Kane & Paddington 2 Fight For The Top Spot appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.