There is a certain bias when it comes to foreign films in America. American critics cut foreign films more slack. If you have a film in French and it has no discernible plot and is very interpretive, then it is considered artistic, abstract and everything was intentional.
Now if an American made the same film in English, then that film is labeled vague, meandering, and the filmmakers were unable to make it complex, especially without being pretentious.
It is a double standard.
Don't believe me? Okay, how about this. Take Hero - Make it in English, with Bruce Willis instead of Jet Li and have it take place in the old west, but otherwise the exact same film. In fact, let the same director direct it, but change his name to Frank Walker instead of Yimou Zhang.
Critics will hate it. Yet, it has just as much story and just as good, if not better performances, since Bruce Willis is probably a better actor than Jet Li.
Why would they hate it? It wasn't in Chinese, about Chinese history, starring Chinese actors and made by Chinese filmmakers.
Lost in translation -
I watched Fabled and I couldn't help feel that it was very European at heart. If you compare this to I'll Sleep When I'm Dead, you'll find Fabled is the stronger of the two, yet that Mike Hodges film is considered great film-making, and the critics found this arrogant and not successful.
Another glaring double standard is symbolism. In Europe and perhaps the rest of the world, symbolism is smart film-making. In the United States it's always looked upon as one, unnecessary and two, as the filmmaker thinking he/she is being clever when they clearly aren't.
It all comes down to expectations. This isn't Memento, nor is it the Grudge.
Come on people, the movie is called Fabled. If you go into it not expecting symbolism and a references to a fable, then go watch Boogeyman.
If you like to think at the movies, at least more than about why did this cost so much, then spend some time with Fabled.
PS. Don't listen to those who say it is only worth one viewing. While there are no twists, there is plenty going on for another go. If only for understanding the voice over alone it is worth that second try.
Now if an American made the same film in English, then that film is labeled vague, meandering, and the filmmakers were unable to make it complex, especially without being pretentious.
It is a double standard.
Don't believe me? Okay, how about this. Take Hero - Make it in English, with Bruce Willis instead of Jet Li and have it take place in the old west, but otherwise the exact same film. In fact, let the same director direct it, but change his name to Frank Walker instead of Yimou Zhang.
Critics will hate it. Yet, it has just as much story and just as good, if not better performances, since Bruce Willis is probably a better actor than Jet Li.
Why would they hate it? It wasn't in Chinese, about Chinese history, starring Chinese actors and made by Chinese filmmakers.
Lost in translation -
I watched Fabled and I couldn't help feel that it was very European at heart. If you compare this to I'll Sleep When I'm Dead, you'll find Fabled is the stronger of the two, yet that Mike Hodges film is considered great film-making, and the critics found this arrogant and not successful.
Another glaring double standard is symbolism. In Europe and perhaps the rest of the world, symbolism is smart film-making. In the United States it's always looked upon as one, unnecessary and two, as the filmmaker thinking he/she is being clever when they clearly aren't.
It all comes down to expectations. This isn't Memento, nor is it the Grudge.
Come on people, the movie is called Fabled. If you go into it not expecting symbolism and a references to a fable, then go watch Boogeyman.
If you like to think at the movies, at least more than about why did this cost so much, then spend some time with Fabled.
PS. Don't listen to those who say it is only worth one viewing. While there are no twists, there is plenty going on for another go. If only for understanding the voice over alone it is worth that second try.