King Richard reviews

[Mister Tee]

It is worth noting that while King Richard and Licorice Pizza's Metacritic scores might be worlds apart, their Rotten Tomatoes score (while a far less telling metric but certainly a far more used industry one) are virtually the same at 92% and 94% respectively. And look, I might be wrong about Licorice Pizza. I think I'm currently the lowest star rating for it on Letterboxd with **1/2. I'm sure I'll like it more on a second viewing. I just rewatched Inherent Vice and liked it quite a bit more. But it's a weird one. Trust me.

Am I wrong, or is the Rotten Tomatoes thing basically a thumbs-up/thumbs-down scale? Meaning, most of us here who've weighed in here would count in the 92% -- "not bad" translating to approval. The Metacritic thing measures intensity of approval, which is kind of important when it comes to choosing a best picture.

I have to say, I'm fascinated to see Licorice Pizza for myself -- for many reasons, but keenly because, while there have been a flood of "it reminds me I love movies" tweets (and not just from the PTA hive; Anne Thompson, for Christ's sake, loved it), the dissenters (a minority, but they exist in some numbers) keep saying the movie is in Punchdrunk Love/Inherent Vice territory, which would be almost no one's favorite Anderson movies, and certainly the least Oscar-friendly. I won't get to the movie till a week or two after Thanksgiving, so I'm for now tantalized with trying to square that seeming contradiction.

Magilla, I don't recall anyone in 1969 talking about John Wayne having had cancer as part of the equation. What they said was, this huge-for-30-years star finally had a showcase role, and it was time for him to win an Oscar. Will Smith is 10 years younger today than Wayne was in '69, but Smith also became a star younger -- he was 27 when Independence Day made him box-office king (Wayne was 32 when Stagecoach lifted him from the obscurity of routine westerns). Smith has now been a star 25 years, which is within shouting distance of where Wayne was in 1969. Both men were far more recognized as audience favorites than as particularly gifted actors: Wayne appeared in a few more prestigious vehicles (mostly Stagecoach and The Quiet Man, though The Alamo somehow snagged a best picture nomination; such films as The Searchers and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance are revered now, but, pre-Cahierists, they were just seen as standard westerns); Smith, on the other hand, outranks him in previous nominations, 2 to 1. I see them as quite analogous.

[Sabin]

Mister Tee wrote
You mean like this guy, who posted a few hours before you?

Well, proper credit then. You were there so you should know.

Mister Tee wrote

Sabin wrote
RE: Variety
Despite rapturous reviews and Oscar buzz, the Warner Bros. release “King Richard” became the latest adult-oriented drama to crumble at the box office.

King Richard sits at 77 on Metacritic, which is certainly okay, but it's not in the same universe as "rapturous reviews". This is another thing to hate about these Crowd Pleasers that Oscar bloggers have come to see as the be-all/end-all of the season: decent audience reaction is inflated to undying love. It's a bit like the way those still-with-Trump white diner patrons in PA were sought out during the Trump years -- their opinions seemed to count more with the media than the majority of citizens. You want to talk rapturous reviews? Licorice Pizza sits at 94. But that's universally framed as "divisive". And it might turn out to be; I won't know till I see it. But the guardians of the gate are trying to decide that ahead of time, before we the people get a chance to make our own determination.

Well, yes, and in that framing, Variety certainly reveals something of a bias there. Or perhaps it's just responding to the current filmic landscape. It's certainly not "rapturous" though. I also couldn't help but noticing their framing of how expensive the film is as well as Will Smith's price tag, but it omits the fact that Will Smith personally paid for bonuses for everyone involved when the film went straight to HBO On Demand. I think this is a pretty good example of a pile-on mentality when a film under-performs or at the very least is part of a dying trend: the movie star films vs. the franchise films. It omits the actor's altruism and highlights his involvement to the detriment of the film's success.

But anyway...

You wrote earlier that people like Jeffrey Wells and Sasha Stone do more harm than good. King Richard is a perfect example of that. This film's not winning Best Picture. It's obvious. I don't know if they're high on their own supply or what, but at this point whatever they are saying, I'm inclined to believe the opposite. King Richard wins it hands-down and The Power of the Dog doesn't have a shot? Got it. That means, The Power of the Dog is a good bet to win and King Richard might not get nominated.

It is worth noting that while King Richard and Licorice Pizza's Metacritic scores might be worlds apart, their Rotten Tomatoes score (while a far less telling metric but certainly a far more used industry one) are virtually the same at 92% and 94% respectively. And look, I might be wrong about Licorice Pizza. I think I'm currently the lowest star rating for it on Letterboxd with **1/2. I'm sure I'll like it more on a second viewing. I just rewatched Inherent Vice and liked it quite a bit more. But it's a weird one. Trust me.

[Big Magilla]

I actually liked Clayton Davis, "that Variety guy" when he had his own blog. I don't know what happened to him since he got picked up by Variety.

I find Erik Anderson's Awards Circuit predictions more reliable, but I was referring to Oscar voters, not bloggers.

I'm not saying Will Smith isn't considered due by some, just that Kenneth Branagh and Bradley Cooper may be considered more due by those who consider such things when making their choice.

I don't know where you guys are getting this John Wayne thing from. The only comparison I see is that Smith is now 20 years past his first Oscar nomination, the same as Wayne was in 1969. The difference is that Wayne was a decade older than Smith is now and had already had his first cancer operation. It was largely seen as his last chance to win an Oscar. Smith, on the other hand, appears to still have a lot of opportunities ahead of him.

Had the film lived up to its hype, been an out-of-the-gate box-office hit, and his performance universally seen as the year's best, then yes, he would continue to be regarded as practically invincible. He may still win, but it's no longer a given.

[Mister Tee]

I'm sure this has been written before by now but this film gives off John Wayne in True Grit vibes.

You mean like this guy, who posted a few hours before you?

As for this winning him the Oscar...I'd say it's a bit like John Wayne: if you think Will Smith needs to have an Oscar, this is the film you're going to say rates it. If, like me, you think Smith is a likable star but a limited actor, you're left seeing it the way dan does: shrugging that there have been far worse leading actor Oscars over the years.

By the way, about that Variety article: even while acknowledging the can't-miss-it box-office shortfall, included this sentence:

Despite rapturous reviews and Oscar buzz, the Warner Bros. release “King Richard” became the latest adult-oriented drama to crumble at the box office.

King Richard sits at 77 on Metacritic, which is certainly okay, but it's not in the same universe as "rapturous reviews". This is another thing to hate about these Crowd Pleasers that Oscar bloggers have come to see as the be-all/end-all of the season: decent audience reaction is inflated to undying love. It's a bit like the way those still-with-Trump white diner patrons in PA were sought out during the Trump years -- their opinions seemed to count more with the media than the majority of citizens. You want to talk rapturous reviews? Licorice Pizza sits at 94. But that's universally framed as "divisive". And it might turn out to be; I won't know till I see it. But the guardians of the gate are trying to decide that ahead of time, before we the people get a chance to make our own determination.

[Sabin]

Big Magilla wrote
There are probably more Oscar voters who feel that Kenneth Branagh and Bradley Cooper are more overdue than Will Smith.

Maybe. I'm not sure. There might be more Oscar bloggers who do.

Overdue can mean different things. It can mean the sheer number of nominations, like Bradley Cooper's incredible nomination total across categories this past year. Or it can mean being a massive movie star institution overdue for critical acclaim. As someone who grew up in the 1990s, I can't tell you what that one-two-three punch of Bad Boys, Independent Day, and Men in Black felt like. As of a sudden, this guy was a major star and everybody loved him. As the nature of stardom has changed, Will Smith hasn't. His movies have grossed six and a half billion dollars worldwide. His movies have not always been hits but he's been easily one of the most bankable stars of the last quarter century.

I'm sure this has been written before by now but this film gives off John Wayne in True Grit vibes. Interesting enough because his competition might be a cowboy (real, not city) insecure about his sexuality. Which (in a fun game that has no bearing on anyway that anybody votes) The Power of the Dog wins Best Picture, Director, and Screenplay and Will Smith takes Best Actor.

[Big Magilla]

The hype behind Belfast as the feel-good movie of the year, sight unseen, seems more on target and it has a theaters only release which Oscar voters on the whole still prefer.

There are probably more Oscar voters who feel that Kenneth Branagh and Bradley Cooper are more overdue than Will Smith.

Branagh has five nominations in five different categories and no wins dating back to 1989. He's apt to be nominated in three this year including Best Picture for the first time, the one that he is most apt to win. He could also win for Original Screenplay but will most likely lose Best Director to Jane Campion for The Power of the Dog.

Cooper has eight nominations in four categories and no wins, all within the last nine years. The hype over his not yet seen performance in Nightmare Alley has died down but he looks good in the newly released trailer. He could still be a player as could the film.

[Reza]

I'm only posting this because it affects King Richard's narrative as an Oscar contender.

But now it's being seen as not quite a bomb, but certainly not the savior some were hoping. That's going to color its chances going into Oscar season.

How much will its boxoffice color its chances? Won't get nominated for best Picture? No big deal as its all about giving the Best Actor Oscar this year to Will Smith. Poitier is too old. Denzel has enough. Nobody else on the radar. So Will Smith it is. And watch it get a nod for best picture and screenplay too despite low boxoffice. Going by the recent past its the kind of film that makes both those lists.

[Sabin]

I'm only posting this because it affects King Richard's narrative as an Oscar contender.

https://variety.com/2021/film/box-offic ... 235116770/

Despite rapturous reviews and Oscar buzz, the Warner Bros. release “King Richard” became the latest adult-oriented drama to crumble at the box office. The film, starring Will Smith as the father of tennis legends Venus and Serena Williams, eked out a meager $5.7 million from 3,302 venues in North America. Heading into the weekend, the studio was projecting a start closer to $10 million.

It may be slightly premature to call “King Richard” an out-and-out bomb because Warner Bros. is releasing it concurrently on HBO Max, which likely cut into ticket sales. The company didn’t report any HBO Max viewership metrics. Warners is hoping that positive sentiment from audiences, who gave the film an “A” CinemaScore,” and awards chatter for Smith could extend its life in theaters and keep the movie playing throughout the holidays. The film wasn’t cheap; it carries a $50 million production budget. Plus, Smith received his full backend box office bonus in addition to his $20 million salary as a make-good for sending the film to HBO Max.

I wonder how long writers are going to have to keep saying "likely" before "cut into ticket sales."

But now it's being seen as not quite a bomb, but certainly not the savior some were hoping. That's going to color its chances going into Oscar season.

[Mister Tee]

danfrank is right to say the movie's not bad. The problem is, it's a movie of negative virtues -- most of the things you say in praise (faint praise) are in vague gratitude for the much worse movie that might have been made, if the creative talent had been more shameless about jerking audience reaction. The film didn't aspire to be anything special; it was conceived as a crowd pleaser, which by definition is more concerned with how an audience is worked over than in anything filmmakers might have had to express. On those terms, it's well-enough written and acted. But I actually wonder if a tactful attempt at crowd-pleasing (which is how I'd describe this) is something of an oxymoron. The Blind Side and Hidden Figures were true-life-inspirational films I felt were far more manipulative than this -- but, at least initially, they seem to have connected better with audiences. Maybe a film with such low ambition works better if it commits fully to its basest appeal; maybe anything else is a version of washing garbage.

Let me say this type of film couldn't be less in my wheelhouse. The well-worn catchphrase "Man plans, and God laughs" seems to me essential to almost all serious art. This film dismisses that whole notion -- it treats Richard Williams' Plan (despite bumps) as practically coming FROM a divinity. As others here have described, Williams is a bull in a china shop -- he brushes aside the way things are usually done, without particular reason beyond "I'm not feeling it" -- and the film seems to believe his end result (two legendary tennis players) proves him right on all counts. But we don't really ever see how or why his way leads to success; in fact, I was pretty unclear on how he got either Tony Goldwyn or Jon Bernthal to bend to his every whim. (In this way, the film resembled Smith's earlier effort The Pursuit of Happyness, where, again, movie star charm is presumed to break through all obstacles.) So, though the film plays (and is acted) at a level that suggests Real Life -- and the occasional reference to the Klan, or Richard's childhood memories, tries to underscore that -- the self-help jargon keeps it ultimately mired in fantasy world. Which doesn't, at the core, interest me.

Smith is fine in the film -- he rises to his back-to-back big scenes, the kitchen confrontation with Ellis and then the monologue about Shreveport. Plus, he has scenes where, first, he stands up to thugs, and then tells off an intrusive social worker -- two soft targets that will get a lot of audiences cheering him. As for this winning him the Oscar...I'd say it's a bit like John Wayne: if you think Will Smith needs to have an Oscar, this is the film you're going to say rates it. If, like me, you think Smith is a likable star but a limited actor, you're left seeing it the way dan does: shrugging that there have been far worse leading actor Oscars over the years.

I can't say I was as impressed with Ellis as I'd anticipated. She's fine -- and does well in that same kitchen scene -- but, based on the festival reaction to her, I expected a more undeniable performance. And I'm with Sabin: I was insanely grateful to Jon Bernthal for livening up the proceedings. Not to nomination level, but he was a breath of fresh air.

As far as the film's hugely disappointing opening weekend: 1) I don't assume that's the end of the story. Darkest Hour and Green Book both looked to have withered on opening weekend; retro stuff like this has a way of rising from the dead; 2) between the HBO MAX handicap and the year-long failure of adult audiences to return to the multiplex, I'm not sure box-office numbers count as much this year.

Though, of course, when your big selling point is what a crowd-pleaser you are, it's a bit embarrassing when those crowds don't immediately materialize. I think it's really time to start flaying those blogger guardians-of-Oscar-season, who keep trying to inflate films like this into award inevitabilities before most people have got a look at them. I'm stupefied anyone could look at this movie and say, yeah: that's what a best picture looks like. It's just such a small thing; who could get that excited about it? But pundits like Feinberg and Wells have been flogging this like it was MIracle on 34th Street, making audiences rapturous with joy. Those people do movies like this more harm than good.

[danfrank]

King Richard is… not bad. It mostly avoids the sports movies or biopic clichés, with the glaring exception of the montage of the real-life players over the end credits. As a character study it gives us some sense of why Richard Williams behaved the way he did, but underplays the narcissistic attention hound that the real Richard Williams was. I was and remain a Williams sisters fan (especially Venus), so observed his antics in real time. Will Smith plays him as a pretty weird dude, and gives a performance that will be far from the worst performance by an Oscar winner. It’s a solid performance. Aunjanue Ellis plays the more relatable character and has the most Oscar-y scene. I think she deserves a nomination, depending on the rest of the competition. If this gets a best picture nod, which it won’t deserve (it’s neither artful nor engaging enough), I can’t see it getting many nominations other than the two actors. Perhaps the song that plays over the end credits?

[Sabin]

Big Magilla wrote
The only thing I disagree with is your assessment of Jon Bernthal's performance. I found his character more annoying than hilarious. I really liked Tony Goldwyn as Venus' first coach. Aside from Aunjanue Ellis as his wife, he was the only character who stood up to "the king" in the entire film.

I was bored and Jon Bernthal was funny. You're probably right that he doesn't belong in the movie but there were larger issues with the film than Jon Bernthal. Tony Goldwyn might actually give the best performance because he's the only character with any consistency.

[Big Magilla]

Good synopsis, Sabin.

The only thing I disagree with is your assessment of Jon Bernthal's performance. I found his character more annoying than hilarious. I really liked Tony Goldwyn as Venus' first coach. Aside from Aunjanue Ellis as his wife, he was the only character who stood up to "the king" in the entire film.

[Sabin]

Just watched King Richard. Yeah, this does not feel like a Best Picture winner. I suppose crazier things have happened. It's a bootstraps narrative. People like those. But at the heart of it, I think it has a Richard Williams problem. His character is written pretty inconsistently. At any point in any scene he could think, do, or say anything for any reason. The most charitable read that I can give to Richard Williams is that he is hyper-aware (or perhaps justly aware) of his place and his family's place in the world as African-Americans from Compton, and that as an individual he is a good, decent, driven man who is also a lovable eccentric whose eccentricities can overstep and become a real problem. Those characters and movies can work, but usually they do so because there's a charm to the conflict between the eccentric (worldview, behavior, etc) and the rest of the world. This film never commits to the notion that Williams is a problem so the conflict that he creates feels sort of... I'm trying to think of how to say this... It feels like everyone in the movie basically just tries to ignore him when he's weird. The end result is a movie with a central character who is a bit all over the place stuck in a boring movie (except for Jon Bernthal who is hilarious) that is lightly tolerant of him but always feels like it could be about mental illness.

[Sabin]

Jeffrey Wells (who is an asshole) is saying that Will Smith is a certain Best Actor contender and possible winner.

[Mister Tee]

This one seems a bit of an odd duck -- something of a sports-inspirational, but with enough nuance that it could win over more demanding critics. If nothing else, apparently a notable performance from a big industry star, and we've seen such vehicles lead to Oscars (Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock).

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movie ... 235008117/

https://variety.com/2021/film/reviews/k ... 235054637/