Bombshell film review- by kermode and mayo

Full text transcript of the Bombshell film review

Oscar nominations for Charlize Theron and for Margot Robbie and for hair and makeup, she was talking about cancer, heroes, prosthetics, and I have to say, usually somebody discusses prosthetics in an interview. There was no point when I was watching the film, I even thought about the prosthetics. I just thought they looked like the type of work, because one of the things one of the things at the title of the film does is it’s it’s a pun. It’s not just the bombshell of the revelations of are happening, but it’s also a pun on the blonde bombshell, which many of which there are many. And the and the film makes quite a big deal of the fact that the characters actually look like a certain type, which is what they’re kind of molded into by, you know, by the environment that they’re in. Interesting as well from the interview to hear that the project was originated before the Weinstein scandal, because obviously, which no one would get, I think you would assume that this has come about as a result of certainly it has added traction as a result of that. And as you said in the interview, I mean, John Lithgow is eerily convincing as this, you know, this predating figure and this sort of shocking thing that he believes that this is his right and he’s in an institution in which nobody is questioning that this is his right, because this is an institutional form of abuse and it has existed for years. And it appears to sort of encompass absolutely everything.

And then what happens is that when the story breaks, initially the corporations stand by their man. There are people wearing Team Roger T-shirts. And there is a question which is that a lawyer says to Nicole Gibson’s character, will other women come forward? And she paused and she says, yes. And then there’s a moment when it’s not immediately apparent that that is what’s going to happen. So I think the thing the film does, which is very good, is it gives you a lot of context in a very brief period of time. I mean, I do think that stylistically it owes a debt to to the big short, although it’s actually sort of stylistically flatter than the big show. The big shot is much more kind of, you know, like a three ring circus in its description of the events. But what it does is it almost kind of satirizes the infotainment style of Fox News in the way in which it’s presenting the stuff. Everything is very punchy, very quick, very sort of there’s a lot of stuff going on that you’re being given these kind of bullet points. And I also think it’s worth noting that I think the film owes an unacknowledged debt to to die for the Nicole Kidman film from way, way back from when you and I Radio one. And it was Film of the month at the time. And even back then, there’s a line in the film, the a line in the publicity for the film that echoes a line that specifically comes from to die for.

And it’s interesting to see Nicole Kidman now taking that role on having the history of, you know, partly addressing this sort of thing in Todai for the phrase that Charlize Theron said in relation to Jay Roach, she wasn’t afraid of the sharp elbows. I think that’s actually that’s exactly right. He also it’s not afraid of the ambiguity, the fact that people find themselves in situations specifically saying what about making Kelly being torn in terms of thinking that, you know, her success has been tied up with this thing that’s happened. The thing that really grounds it, however, is the performances. And I think if if the performances weren’t as strong as they were, you’d start to see the cracks appear to some extent in the drama. It would start to look more like a kind of like a TV movie. But because the performances are as good as they are, you’re you completely buy into the into the unfolding drama. I mean, I didn’t know an awful lot of this, you know, the headlines, but you don’t know a lot of the kind of behind the behind the headline stuff, which I think this does really get to. There is a brilliant scene in which the camera focuses on Margaret Robi’s face during a particularly horrible moment. And the expression on her face, I think, is is really well judged. And sometimes I think that the performances are slightly better judged than the direction of the film itself.

So I think while I think the film is fine and well done and actually well written, I think what carries it is the strength of those three leads that although there is this weird situation in which you have this kind of archetype stereotype that is created for the channel, that this is going to go over over the news. Is that, OK, if I come back to this, we have to stop. When the new stuff I know I stop it, then I’ll pick up again. OK, so I think for me the performance is the thing that carries it. I have more to say, which I will do after the news. So just the last last few things that I wanted to say was I think one of the things that’s interesting is that some of the most powerful moments in the film are the are the moments in which characters ask other characters, why didn’t you stand by me? Why didn’t you send one of the things that the film does capture is that really weird thing about a poisonous environment in which people can be divided against each other by an environment in which nobody can speak out. And Charlize Theron said in that interview, there’s the example from beforehand about, you know, what happened to and I think the film does a very good job of creating an. Standard situation in which you can see that all of these people have individually got a reason to speak out, but none of them can because because it’s because there’s culture that they are in is so designed to prevent that happening.

And I think that is particularly relevant. And I think it’s particularly relevant in the light also of the Weinstein revelations and how I mean, said there’s a speech that we heard in that clip in which it’s explained very clearly, you know, just the practicalities of speaking out. But you really do start to understand the sense of an environment in which it is impossible to speak out against something because it is so institutional, it is so much part of the landscape and the wallpaper and the whole culture. And I think now, obviously, you know, one should say that from my point of view, I thought surely Throm was very, very balanced in that interview in which he said, you know, Fox News is basically a news delivery service for people on the right and therefore it’s valid. I mean, I should say I don’t believe it’s valid. And that obviously affects the way in which I watch a film, because my own belief about that kind of infotainment news, which is just so massively skewed, you know, I do believe I mean, obviously, I work for the BBC and I do actually believe in BBC impartiality above all things. And I think that other networks don’t have that. And I think that one of the things that’s interesting at the towards the end of the film is that there is a an appearance by Malcolm McDowell and it’s one of the most damning bits of casting.

Great. I’ve ever seen. It’s good. Yeah, but it’s brilliant because it’s Malcolm McDowell and all the baggage that Malcolm McDowell brings with that. And I also think that because the issue of the Trump thing is raised, it does do a pretty sharp job of setting the background for how it is that Fox News could then essentially become the mouthpiece for Trump’s kind of, you know, cultural hinterland. How it is that that Fox News is the place that Trump uses and it talks about the way in which they start to recognize that Trump and Trump’s opinions are actually in line with their opinions. So I think all of that stuff is is well done. And considering it’s a movie that moves at a pace and it is an entertaining film as well, I mean, occasionally, occasionally there was part of me that thought it’s in danger of becoming glib, but I think the performances are so strong and so committed and so kind of a strange mixture of Arche, but also utterly sincere that you’d have to be you’d have to be a very strange person not to come out of it thinking that’s a very, very that’s a very damning portrait of a very poisonous culture. Also, Marco, Robi’s character, who is not based on anyone or based on a number of people. Yes, the composite character was that character.

She says when she introduces herself, when we when we meet for the first time that she thinks it is that Fox is balanced because it balances the liberal bias in the rest of the media that’s there. Just that the news is fine. And then the comment is not balanced, but it is balancing the broader picture. So that is that is the justification. That is indeed the justification.