The Critic

Unlikely the movie's titular character, Jimmy Erskine, played deliciously by Ian McKellen, I am not a professional critic/judge/reviewer.

I am, however, someone who enjoys a good story. Alas, "The Critic" baffles me. On the one hand, it had the potential of good mystery, but it didn't choose to go that way. It also had the potential to be a good revenge caper. Sadly, it also didn't go that way.

Instead, we get in a quick run-time of 1 hour 40 minutes in which we don't really get good characterization, a good plot, or even a good crime story. Instead, we get a hurried and inadequate portrayal of a desperate man.

And why is he desperate? That's not really the right question. If you do decide to watch this movie, you'll know what I mean.

I had hoped for so much more from The Critic due to its premise, title and cast. I was bitterly disappointed. The pointless and fruitless direction of this film is frustrating. We see a random array of events that add little to no value. It seems like we are watching a bunch of uneventful situations playout, I found myself asking so what? Humanity is not great at times but why did we need to see a film about this and how on earth did this get the green light? Where was the payoff or purpose? Veteran actor, Ian Mckellen, gives a solid performance but it is not enough to save this pitiful excuse of a film.

London, 1934 - Arch vicious theatre critic Jimmy Erskine (Ian McKellen) is a homosexual and is forever close to being arrested either with his current live in lover and secretary, Turner or when picking men up in the park. Eventually caught, he is fired from his job by his boss Viscount Brooke (Mark Strong) and so looks for revenge by getting up and coming actress Nina (Gemma Arterton) to seduce the married and famous Brooke in exchange for good reviews, so that Erskine can blackmail him into getting his job back. Complications ensue.

Very dark and occasionally wry look at the role of this powerful critic and his desperation to cling on to power and notoriety whatever it takes, which McKellen, sneering playfully throughout, obviously thoroughly enjoys playing. Overall, it is a little too relentlessly dark and the notion of Erskine convincing Nina to seduce Brooke doesn't wholly stacks up. That said it's well put together, has a nice score and McKellen is inevitably rather good.

Anyone who thinks this tale exaggerated was not alive when critics for the papers really did have this much power, which survived into the 1970s to some degree. Ian McKellen delivers a powerful portrayal of an aged, egotistical, and vain theatre critic of the 1930s.

Walter Kerr in New York in the 1950s and 1960s had such power but was, I am pleased to say, not anything like the corrupt McKellen character. The story is based upon the novel CURTAIN CALL by the interesting novelist Anthony Quinn (no relation to the actor of that name), who enjoys writing stories set in the early to mid-twentieth century in England. I have read a couple and have more sitting around waiting for my attention. McKellen's character is gay, a condition not unknown to McKellen himself I believe. An adoring younger man lives with him and looks after him, played with quiet devotion by an excellent young actor named Alfred Enoch who underplays the role so well that it makes the entire story more plausible. McKellen's character walks a dangerous tightrope in numerous ways and seems perversely to enjoy the thrill of taking such risks. And he progressively pushes out the boundaries of his audacity and pomposity to see just how far he can go, which is pretty far. But then the actress Nina Land come into the story, played by Gemma Arterton. With breath-taking audacity, McKellen believes he can make use of her in a complex blackmail plot to regain his position as critic, having just been fired for being caught with his trousers down with a chap, if you see what I mean. Remember this was all illegal then. He engages in this plot because his boss, the titled owner of a major newspaper, is romantically obsessed with the girl, despite being married to Romola Garai. (I didn't say anything!) The gloomy and obsessed owner of the paper is magnificently played by Mark Strong. Indeed, all the acting in this film is finely attuned to some invisible tuning-fork to get just the right pitch. I guess we can congratulate the director, Anand Tucker, for making all that happen, and delivering to us such a moody and atmospheric study of moral corruption in London's theatreland.

The director, fully aware of how bad the movie is, had 350 people from the Philippines give it a 10/10 rating (check the voting statistics if you like).

The Critic keeps a respectful distance from its material, favoring neat dramatic ironies over shocking twists or raw, anguished revelations. Perhaps the harshest criticism one could level against it-something Jimmy, the self-proclaimed judge of creative genius, might find particularly insulting-is that the film is far too polite and cautious for a portrayal of such a ruthless character.

Movie is thankfully short, yet it still feels drawn out. Its appeal will likely be limited to older audiences drawn by McKellen's name and the subject matter, offering them mildly engaging streaming content.