Cento: What Hollywood Tells Us
ByI’ll probably see The Big Year eventually; I thought the book, for all its stubbornly manifest inaccuracies, was very funny in places, and Steve Martin is one of my favorites.
For now, though, what I’m finding fascinating is the rare opportunity to look at birding from the outside, as critics and reviewers explain the phenomenon to their non-birding readers. So here’s what we apparently look like to “normal” people:
Bird-watching seems like a harmless hobby, and I’ve penciled it into the calendar for my golden years. - Joe Williams
For most of the general population the only thing more boring than birding itself is watching other people do it. - Robert Levin
True, birding may be a solitary, insular pursuit, only important to those who enjoy its meek geek attributes. – Bill Gibron
Bird-watching — or birding, as practitioners prefer to call it — makes for a stupefyingly boring movie. – Rene Rodriguez
Maybe it’s impossible to make anything really interesting, on a subject that is itself so inherently uninteresting. - Joshua Tyler
Aside from an international staring contest and the World Series of Texting, there aren’t many challenges less suited for a movie than competitive bird watching. – Matt Pais
People with plenty of disposable income travel to locales on a moment’s notice whenever they hear of an unusual or uncommon species that has decided to land on a branch or a rock or a beach …. setting up tripods in garbage dumps, hunkering down for long hours in the woods and making silly sounds with one’s lips. – Teddy Durgin
Competitive birding is only for the leisure class or for young people sponsored by their rich, indulgent parents. - James Verniere
A long, slightly dull slog …. But then, that’s birding for you. – Stephen Whitty
An asinine sort-of sport. – Dustin Putman
17 Comments
October 14th, 2011 at 11:23 am
[...] Big Year Reviewers By Corey • October 14, 2011 • No comments yetShareTweetRick Wright has a post with a collection of quotes from reviewers of The Big Year that doesn’t exactly put bir…. Tags: Asides • Have you seen the cool 10,000 Birds t-shirts? Get yours today! • Explore [...]
October 14th, 2011 at 11:23 am
Ouch!
October 14th, 2011 at 11:40 am
Ha. I was just reading these, actually. It is rather fascinating.
October 14th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
I would have the exact same thoughts on movies about golf or starring Adam Sandler.
October 14th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Hi Rick,
This is quite a compendium for sure.
But saying, “So here’s what we apparently look like to ‘normal’ people,” strikes me as shockingly incomplete. I may be wrong, but it appears to me, having looked over the Rotten Tomatoes reviews several times, that what you’ve done here is showcase a bunch of the most gruesomely negative reviews. That’s a totally legitimate thing to do, like going to a house of horrors, which many people enjoy.
But nobody I know would mistake a house of horrors as accurately reflecting the full spectrum of life. Hope not, anyhow.
October 14th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
No, I didn’t look for negative reviews: it didn’t matter to me what the reviews thought of the m o v i e; what interested me was what the reviewers thought of b i r d i n g.
As a birder who spends most of his talking time talking to other birders, I find reading these reviews a great way to see how the “other half” (or the other 97%) thinks of birding.
October 14th, 2011 at 1:04 pm
Yes, Sharon, exactly: to non-birders, we’re all just exactly like golfers or iris breeders or Edsel collectors.
October 14th, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Rick,
Thanks for the clarification. I do see the difference. But I’m still going to push back on a couple of points.
1. Did any of the reviewers who had these thoughts about birding like the movie? I’d guess not.
2. Did any of the reviewers who liked the movie have much more positive opinions of birding? I’d guess so.
If my guesses are correct, what would that tell us? That liking the movie and having a positive view of birding are correlated. Same on the negative side. I think both are very, very likely.
3. As much as I enjoy film criticism, movie critics (perhaps especially internet-based ones?) have certain tendencies toward wanting to skewer films, and, well, everything. I don’t want to stereotype film critics, but I don’t think I’m wrong here. Some critics appear to view all films as opponents to wrestled with, and killed, if possible.
So I return to my assertion that your list, gruesomely funny as it is, doesn’t come close to conveying, “what we…look like to ‘normal’ people.”
Interesting topic, Rick!
October 14th, 2011 at 2:34 pm
1. Probably not; I didn’t keep track.
2. I didn’t run across a n y “much more positive opinions of birding.” I leave it to you to compile those.
3. I don’t think the movie needs to be defended from the critics.
The fact remains that one has no difficulty gleaning comments similar to those above with just a quick glance at the writing about this movie, and either their authors are lying or that’s what they think. Now whether any of them can be accounted “normal people” I couldn’t say….
And the more important fact is that the general view of birding hasn’t really changed much since the days of Don Knotts in The Love God, my favorite birding movie.
October 14th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
To the extent that there is a “general view of birding,” of course.
October 14th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
I’m as Australian birder so I’m yet to see the film however i have read some of the reviews. Perhaps like many birders i would welcome more understanding of our hobby / passion / lifestyle. Hopefully the film helps some of the public, who would otherwise would remain ignorant, start to understand the fascination of birds, their habits and habitats.
Please don’t get too concerned with ignorant or negative statements from reviewers. They just don’t get it – enough said.
Some reviewers have been gentler with the film and birding as the following brief selection attests;
“But like birding itself, “The Big Year” rewards patience. It respects both the integrity and the eccentricity of the avian obsession, and it communicates something of the fascinating abundance and weirdness of the animals themselves.”
AO Scott The New York Times
“The Big Year offers a glimpse into a little-known world. It’s low-key and lightly amusing, told at a tranquil pace appropriate for a film about gentle souls watching feathered creatures.”
Claudia Puig USA TODAY
“To handle this very quirky and fundamentally decent world,”
Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times Film Critic
“But there is still a quixotic aspect to searching for something so elusive in vast and varied landscapes, and the movie captures something of that.”
Mary Pols, Time
“Birders. You call them birders. Calling them “bird-watchers” is insulting, like calling a Trekker a Trekkie. They are aware that some people find birding to be an eccentric hobby, but you get better exercise and scenery than you do with golf, and you don’t have to play the game.”
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times
October 14th, 2011 at 9:20 pm
The movie was funny (I laughed a lot) – even with all of its “stubbornly manifest inaccuracies”, as Rick so aptly described the book. It’s not deep and it’s a simple story, which are things that will easily draw criticism from the film aficionados. It’s interesting to hear birders say things like “I hope they don’t make us look bad”… really? do you really care? Rick- I’m not making the assumption that you do care, and I see the anthropological value in culling these comments if for no other reason than because they’re funny (although Rene Rodriguez has always been a second-rate reviewer for the Miami Herald), but this film IS entertainment, not a documentary (the opening line is “This is a true story. Just the facts have been changed”). Now if you want REAL crazies- check out the BBC documentary “Twitchers”… put that on the big screen and watch parents across the country strip their kids of their plastic 7×20 Tasco’s in a New York minute.
October 15th, 2011 at 11:54 am
I make ads for a living. Sometimes, my ads offend some people. In EVERY case, those people would never have bought what I was selling anyway so who gives a shit if they were offended. Same goes with this. People that are interested will be, those that aren’t, won’t. Again, who gives a shit if they’d never have been into birding anyway. This film was never going to be shown at Cannes, Tribeca or any other prestigious festival. Nor was it ever meant to go down in history as one of the greatest films of our time. It’s just a light hearted comedy that happens to be about birders. Looking at the critics, many of the top critics (as per rotten tomatoes) gave it an ok review. It’s mostly attention starved douchebags that were mean spirited. They need to be. It’s their only time to stand out when they are clearly at the bottom of their profession. I’ve stated a few times that I don’t think it’ll be a great film but someone the other day said to me, “The only thing worse than being talked poorly about, is not being talked about at all.” At least now non-birders are talking about birding. That’s true and if there are even 100 new birders after this film, that’s 100 more people that care about their survival than before the film.
Of course, all this is so built on personal opinion, there is no right or wrong answer…
http://www.punkrockbigyear.blogspot.com
October 16th, 2011 at 11:12 am
I think that many, many people really believe this is a movie about birding itself. It’s NOT. Birding is merely the backdrop for a little slice of life of those who have a passion. Those who believe that this is a birding movie, and therefore boring, just don’t get it. If anyone has a love of antiques, collecting vintage coke bottles or Norman Rockwell Saturday Evening Post covers, or Disney memorabilia, or old silverware, or whatever, they have an understanding about the love of just being out there and the process of discovery. Sometimes you don’t have to get the ‘target’ thing, just looking for it is often excitement enough…for a while.
The characters in this film are interesting and well done (good casting). It does cover the range from those with a strong love of the chase to those obsessed by the win. The main story is interesting, funny and well acted. Too bad there are many who just can’t see through the title.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:58 am
I thoroughly enjoyed the film. It was thoughtful, charming, and lots of fun.
Many of the reviewers are disappointed. The film is actually being criticized for not reaching its potential “comedic heights.” Thankfully, this is not a movie about birding geekdom. And I think that that seems to be the source of many reviewer complaints.
Lucky us.
Rick, I think the NEW YORK TIMES reviewer, A.O. Scott, got it right:
http://movies.nytimes.com/2011/10/14/movies/the-big-year-with-owen-wilson-and-steve-martin-review.html?pagewanted=print
October 16th, 2011 at 7:58 pm
Thanks for the link to the review by A. O. Scott Paul. I haven’t seen the movie yet but plan to soon.
October 16th, 2011 at 10:40 pm
If birding had to be taken on by Hollywood, I wish it had been Christopher Guest to do it. He has taken other activities that most people find silly, bizarre, or just plain dull, and built good-natured comedies with broad appeal around them. It’s not true that you can’t make a good comedy out of a topic the audience previously had no interest in; a skilled hand can make a good comedy out of just about anything.