Letters to the Editor
-
The weakness of the performance as a critic
In classic Salon fashion, Zacharek has already panned the movie. In her first essay she went on and and on about how much she hated what she saw as "grand intentions".
Now she gets a second round to say the same thing, except gleefully sticking it to an individual (an activit she really enjoys).
She omits the context of the movie as a whole, even though she wrote a whole essay about it and makes a personal attack on Lewis and his entire career because he plays the role as written and directed.
Yes, we get it. You felt the movie was trying to be epic and you didn't like it. Also, you think Daniel Day Lewis is pretentious, self-regarding and gossip about his method.
In addition Zacharek's weakens her critical voice with dictatorial mannerisms which undermine the idea it is criticism - a matter of taste.
If you play hectoring know-it-all, like Mark Kermode or Pauline Kael, you need to establish credibility and leave a hint of room for dissent. Instead Zacharek gives a verdict without proving she's qualified to judge.
It's worse for those familiar with her work: celebrity gossip, double standards for actresses, inane backlash reporting about how single gals vote, etc. She generaly takes a simplistic contrarian pose on everything. After years of plowing this row she can rarely shake the tone of "Looky here! I'm making a rebellious pronouncement!"
Perhaps her intent in quoting her actor friend is giving proper credit for a bon mot, but it seems like she's trying to present an unnamed "expert" as evidence.
Plus the essay rests on a narrow definition of "good" acting, one which I'd argue Zacharek doesn't believe herself. She praises overwrought, mannerist films like Redacted and Lions for Lambs.
Also, I noticed that headlines for Zacharek tends to flog the question "but is it enough?" Her most frequent critique are films which just don't do enough to please her. That she now rips into an actor for going over the top (and repeating himself) is highly ironic.