Film, like paintings and music, is an art form, and art is subjective. No matter how thoroughly you analyze a piece of art, there's no "right" or "wrong" way to look at it. To some, this is freeing and is what makes art so interesting, to others, it is a frustrating reality. So how is it possible to label a film as definitively "good" or "bad?" Isn't it all just a matter of opinion? No. Believe it or not there is one objective way to label the artistic success of a film. Let's discuss...
Ever since pictures began to move, there have been films that the general public has labeled as either "good" or "bad." The Wikipedia article for "List of Films Considered the Best" is littered with big names like The Godfather, Citizen Kane, Vertigo, Gone with the Wind, and Seven Samurai. Similarly, the Wikipedia article for "List of Films Considered the Worst" includes infamous titles such as, Reefer Madness, Glitter, Battlefield Earth, and Plan 9 From Outer Space. But what makes these films so different from one another? Are they just "good" or "bad" because enough people say so? After all, these works are purely subjective, right?
There are a lot of reasons why a film could be considered either "good" or "bad." Terrible performances, bad special effects, a poorly written script, and a plethora of other things can contribute to how a particular movie is received by the public. People will always find aspects to criticize in "good" films and aspects to commend in "bad films." No matter how hard we try, there will never be a true, concrete way to objectively judge art, it is all a matter of personal opinion.
But for me, "bad" art is failed art. This doesn't mean art that has failed to make a lot of money or win over the hearts of critics, I'm talking about a piece of art that sets out with a particular goal in mind and does not achieve it. A film that doesn't do justice to a particular figure or story, a film that's message is muddled and unclear, a film that offends those it tried to represent. When it comes to art, these sins have no redemption, and would all classify a film as "failed."
Perhaps the most glaring, recent example of this kind of "failed" film is the controversial Netflix original, Emilia Perez, directed by Jacques Audiard. No doubt you've heard of it if you keep up with awards season. The film has achieved an infamous reputation after being nominated for various awards despite abysmal reviews from audience members. The film currently holds a critics score of 73% on Rotten Tomatoes, while simultaneously holding an audience score of 18%. It made headlines when it scored 13 Oscar nominations, just 1 short of the all-time record held by Titanic. Needless to say, millions are outraged by the film's success.
But Emilia Perez is not a "bad" film just because enough people say so, it is a bad film because it actively fails in its message and methodology. Emilia Perez sets out to create an authentic, empathetic view of Mexico, and according to Mexican viewers and critics, it definitively does not. This is a blight that began at the root of the film, director, Jacques Audiard is not Mexican, he is French, and does not speak neither Spanish nor English. The film was entirely shot in Paris, and Audiard has admitted to various outlets that he did not conduct any extensive research on Mexico before making this film.
When it first premiered at Cannes back in May 2024, the film was met with rapturous applause from critics and audiences alike, but this admiration seemed to only be shared among non-Hispanic and Latino viewers. The titular character, Emilia, was a former cartel leader before her transition, and the film is very empathetic towards her struggles with identity and family. The Mexican public has taken great issue with this because the country's cartels are a source of pain and hardship for countless people and they feel like Emilia's actions are being excused simply because she is a transgender woman. To put in American terms, it's like if someone made a glowing biopic about Osama bin Laden.
Another recent example of a "failed" film is Justin Baldoni's It Ends with Us, also premiering in 2024. Despite being a major success at the box office, the film received mixed to negative reviews from critics and audiences alike. There are plenty of things to criticize about this movie, from the clunky dialogue to the forgettable performances, but the real fault lies in its messaging, or rather, how the film goes about conveying that message. It Ends with Us is a romantic drama that attempts to tell an empathetic, authentic, harrowing story about domestic violence. Unfortunately, it was written by novelist, Colleen Hoover who has about as much knowledge on the topic as someone who skimmed over the wikipedia article for "abuse."
Domestic violence is a very heavy topic that far too many people across the globe struggle with, especially women. It Ends with Us gave audiences an extremely lukewarm depiction of abuse. It really just feels like an average love triangle story with an abuse storyline shoehorned in to make audiences root for one man over the other. It uses domestic violence as a mere plot device, and a weak one at that.
The brutal truth is that Colleen Hoover is not nearly a good enough writer to deal with a topic this serious. And while the film certainly had good intentions, that can only take it so far. The movie set out with a clear goal in mind, to tell a powerful story about overcoming abuse but it ended up being an inauthentic, saccharine mess. A class example of a "failed" film.
Film, like any other art form is subjective, but only to a certain extent. Justin Baldoni's It Ends with Us, and Jacques Audiard's Emilia Perez are films that have been met with heaps of negative criticism since their releases for various aspects. While there are plenty of subjective reasons to label a film as "good" or "bad," a film that fails to deliver its central message is perhaps the most objective way we can criticize the quality of a film.
Commentaires