Movies

Let’s stop pretending that standing ovations at film festivals are newsworthy

BBG News

Let's stop pretending that standing ovations at film festivals are newsworthy

As a movie reviewer with decades of experience under my belt, I’ve seen more than my fair share of films that have left audiences spellbound and critics divided. The standing ovation for “Joker: Folie à Deux” at the Venice Film Festival was nothing short of extraordinary – 10 to 12 minutes of heartfelt applause! But let me tell you something, folks, I’ve seen longer ovations – like the time I watched a three-hour marathon of “Bluey” episodes and gave it a standing ovation for the entire nine minutes.

At the Venice Film Festival on Wednesday, when “Joker: Folie à Deux” was first shown, an extended standing ovation ensued, lasting anywhere from 10.5 to 12.5 minutes, as reported by Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, and Deadline respectively.

Despite the duration being unclear, renowned actor Joaquin Phoenix left before the audience’s applause subsided – he was seen departing from the Sala Grande theater following approximately nine minutes of applause.

Approximately twice as long as an average “Bluey” episode or roughly the time it takes elite athletes to complete a 5k race, stands and applauds after watching a movie is quite a substantial duration.

But the length of a standing ovation doesn’t really have any correlation to a film’s quality. Early reviews for “Folie à Deux” have been mixed, with some critics hailing Todd Phillips’ “Joker” sequel as “brilliant” and “impressively odd” and others calling it “frustrating” and “underwhelming.”

Still, reporting the length of the standing ovation after a screening has become a routine part of film festival coverage, especially for Hollywood trades. On Monday, Pedro Almodóvar’s first English-language feature, “The Room Next Door,” made headlines for applause that lasted 17 minutes (or 18 minutes and 36 seconds, depending on who’s counting) at its Venice premiere. This topped the 12-or-13-minute ovation clocked by Brady Corbet’s epic “The Brutalist” just the day before and is reportedly the longest in Venice Film Festival history.

Some outlets even keep an ongoing tally of the length of standing Os at film festivals. This tongue-in-cheek coverage is fine as long as it’s understood that it’s often an arbitrary way to quantify a film and not a yardstick for success. (And even The Times includes details about standing ovation length in its coverage.) But we shouldn’t pretend that the length of every standing ovation is newsworthy or treat it as any sort of meaningful metric on its own — especially since the time clocked sometimes varies by publication.

Unfortunately, a self-reinforcing trend emerges: As more media outlets highlight the duration of standing ovations in festival reviews, these become seen as significant metrics. This increased interest in ovation length then encourages further coverage about it to boost web traffic. Additionally, the knowledge that their response is being monitored might influence how long festival attendees are willing to applaud for the filmmakers and artists they admire.

At various art exhibitions and film festivals, it’s common to see the audience showing their admiration through hearty applause, a tradition that dates back quite some time. For instance, the renowned Cannes Film Festival is known for its lengthy standing ovations, as well as instances where the crowd vocalizes disapproval with boos.

At film festivals, the prolonged standing ovations given to Guillermo del Toro’s “Pan’s Labyrinth” (lasting 22 minutes at its 2006 Cannes premiere) and Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11” (with a 20-minute applause in 2004 at the same festival, which eventually won the Palme d’Or) are frequently mentioned as examples of extraordinary receptions. However, not every film that garners ten minutes or more of cheering achieves both critical and commercial success.

Applause at Venice has not always been as prolonged. For example, the 2019 premiere of the Golden Lion-winning “Joker,” which garnered eight minutes of applause, was not an exception. This movie, a backstory and character analysis of one of the most well-known comic book villains, faced mixed opinions from critics regarding its portrayal of violence and masculinity but managed to earn over $1 billion globally. Phoenix’s performance in this film earned him an Oscar as well.

The dark comedy “Poor Things,” directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, who won the Golden Lion last year, received a prolonged standing ovation lasting around 10 minutes (or 8 minutes as reported by Variety). This film was generally praised by both critics and audiences, earning $117.6 million globally and receiving numerous award nominations. One of its significant recognitions included an Oscar for its lead actress, Emma Stone. However, the movie sparked debate due to its explicit sexual content; the main character is a woman reborn with a child’s brain.

Additionally, there have been cases similar to the controversial 2022 release of “Blonde.” Directed by Andrew Dominik, this film portraying a fictionalized Marilyn Monroe received an extended 14-minute standing ovation. However, it seems that this movie has already faded from many people’s memories.

It’s wonderful when we hear applause. Let’s encourage the artists who create pieces that touch our hearts. Even those who try their best, even if they’re right here with us, deserve our appreciation, as making art isn’t easy.

But movies are more than a collection of stats like the length of a standing ovation or box office haul — discussions generated by “Joker” and “Poor Things” can’t be reduced to their numbers. Our conversations about these giant celebrations of movies known as film festivals should reflect that too.

Read More

2024-09-07 14:08

Previous post Doctor Who’s Karen Gillan pregnant with first child as she debuts baby bump
Next post Coleen Nolan is forced to hit back at fan claims she ‘left out’ co-stars from her Loose Women 25th anniversary tribute