'Be Kind Rewind' is set in a close-knit community, in a video rental store so small it only stocks about 50 videos - having yet made the daunting transition to DVDs. The owner of the store leaves to spy on their competitor, West Coast Videos, which has made the jump to DVD successfully, leaving Mike (Mos Def) in charge. Mike's best friend Jerry (a zany Jack Black) is a paranoid loser who manages to erase every tape after having his brain magnetised as the result of a quite spectacular electrocution. Struggling financially and unable to replace the videos, they do what any normal person wouldn't do: they remake them! These remakes are charming and lend the film much of the 'whimsy' and 'childlike wonderment' all the positive reviews keep gushing about. The process of remaking is nicknamed 'sweding' after Jerry swindles some customers into believing the remakes are imported from Sweden, and thus are very expensive.
Witnessing 'Be Kind Rewind' be (inevitably) mis-interpreted, much the same way 'The Science of Sleep' was a year or so ago, has coerced me into writing this review. This film is a light comedy - boasting quirky performances, inventive special effects and this decade's new term for the YouTube generation: swede. The explosion of sweded films online is a testament to this film's ability to unleash creativity in people.
The film is not meant to be taken too seriously! It's a delightful little ode to the art of film-making. It's light, it's funny, it's sweet(swede?). The only fault I found was at the end, which I thought was too corny and absurdly improbable, but guiltily enjoyable because it is pretty uplifting.
As for the low probability that stores somewhere on Earth are still renting out VHS, I assumed the film was set in the not-so-distant past (perhaps 4 or 5 years ago?). It works two ways: as a comedy, but also as a historical film that depicts the challenges facing, and the implications on video rental businesses, of converting to DVDs. The characters in Be Kind Rewind have procrastinated in making this transition, and the predicament the whole film is based upon is a direct result of this unwillingness to move with the times.
There is definitely enough laughs, enough emotion, and enough clever sub-text about history and technology to keep viewers interested. I thought there were many clever allusions in the film, most notably when Sigourney Weaver, making a very self-reflexive cameo as a copyright infringement lawyer, comments, "And we're the bad guys", in reference to the binary opposites used in classical Hollywood narratives: good vs. bad etc. This film has so much to offer below the surface, and it really is worth viewing several times.
So, after much consideration, my disappointment lies not in the film as I originally suspected, but with you. The audience. My rating is not a reflection of how technically good the film is, nor the result of comparison to 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' - it is a measure of how much I enjoyed the film, and enjoyed it I did. Comparing it to a film of a different genre with a different writer with different ambitions as a film is not fair. This film doesn't pretend to be super-deep, philosophical or art-house. It is unashamedly directed at a mainstream audience, and this is key to understanding why this film is receiving so many bad reviews. The film is not bad in itself.
I bet if no-one knew it was by Michel Gondry it would be hailed as an original masterwork (much like 'Being John Malkovich' was, almost solely on its bizarre premise) - what does that say about audiences?
Witnessing 'Be Kind Rewind' be (inevitably) mis-interpreted, much the same way 'The Science of Sleep' was a year or so ago, has coerced me into writing this review. This film is a light comedy - boasting quirky performances, inventive special effects and this decade's new term for the YouTube generation: swede. The explosion of sweded films online is a testament to this film's ability to unleash creativity in people.
The film is not meant to be taken too seriously! It's a delightful little ode to the art of film-making. It's light, it's funny, it's sweet(swede?). The only fault I found was at the end, which I thought was too corny and absurdly improbable, but guiltily enjoyable because it is pretty uplifting.
As for the low probability that stores somewhere on Earth are still renting out VHS, I assumed the film was set in the not-so-distant past (perhaps 4 or 5 years ago?). It works two ways: as a comedy, but also as a historical film that depicts the challenges facing, and the implications on video rental businesses, of converting to DVDs. The characters in Be Kind Rewind have procrastinated in making this transition, and the predicament the whole film is based upon is a direct result of this unwillingness to move with the times.
There is definitely enough laughs, enough emotion, and enough clever sub-text about history and technology to keep viewers interested. I thought there were many clever allusions in the film, most notably when Sigourney Weaver, making a very self-reflexive cameo as a copyright infringement lawyer, comments, "And we're the bad guys", in reference to the binary opposites used in classical Hollywood narratives: good vs. bad etc. This film has so much to offer below the surface, and it really is worth viewing several times.
So, after much consideration, my disappointment lies not in the film as I originally suspected, but with you. The audience. My rating is not a reflection of how technically good the film is, nor the result of comparison to 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' - it is a measure of how much I enjoyed the film, and enjoyed it I did. Comparing it to a film of a different genre with a different writer with different ambitions as a film is not fair. This film doesn't pretend to be super-deep, philosophical or art-house. It is unashamedly directed at a mainstream audience, and this is key to understanding why this film is receiving so many bad reviews. The film is not bad in itself.
I bet if no-one knew it was by Michel Gondry it would be hailed as an original masterwork (much like 'Being John Malkovich' was, almost solely on its bizarre premise) - what does that say about audiences?