Now, this story is so strong that the limited inspiration that goes into this film proves to be enough to make a rewarding final product, yet whether it be because of '60s superficialities or simply because structure and dramatics aren't quite as realized as they ought to be, the reward value goes challenged. Being fictionalized, this biopic has an opportunity to draw rich, challenging character as a study on a somewhat evil man showcasing redeemable qualities, but subtlety issues both demonize antagonistic men of justice, and glorify protagonistic men of crime, to where the film really does feel manufactured as an allegory against capital punishment, and superficial as a potentially gripping prison drama which falls victim to sensibilities of the time. The film is a loose biopic, and therefore with a lot of opportunities to take liberties which really do feel manufactured, in their dramatics, whose histrionic conflicts, thin characterization and sentimental approach make a melodramatic film that ambitiously struggles to compensate for some lack of depth. This is ultimately a rather formulaic biopic which hits a number of tropes, including those of the time, such as some surprisingly cheesy dialogue pieces and happenings whose fluffiness proves to be almost as detrimental to a sense of weight as fluffiness to the drama itself. This film may be a study on most of a man's adult life, but its scale in minimalist, yet its structure is excessive, thus, it's only a matter of time before storytelling becomes repetitious, almost monotonous, due to the final product's taking so much time to say only so much, and hardly anything new as a biopic. I can't even joke about that after starting this article with a reminder of "The Iceman Cometh", and at any rate, the film keeps you interested, no matter how long it very much is.Īs long as this film is, some focal unevenness derives from storytelling's paying little mind to the extensive development of plot layers and supporting roles which jar in and out as major narrative aspects, no matter how much exposition meanders for two-and-a-half hours. I can't believe that this film is actually older than "Birdman and the Galaxy Trio", but that barely counts, because this film was probably still running by the time the Hanna-Barbera cartoon in question launched, five years after the projectors started up. Actually, I don't know how much realism you can put into the biopic of Harvey Birdman, but this still ought to be an interesting way to kick off this cartoon franchise. You have to at least give this film credit for its taking realistic liberties, because I don't know how ill-mannered Stroud could be in real life if he looked like Burt Lancaster.
I can see why birds, if you will, "flocked" to him, because he wished he looked like Burt Lancaster, although I suppose we'll have to run with it, seeing as how this is supposed to be a largely fictionalized biopic of Stroud. cameth (I guess), John Frankenheimer saw the coming of the birdman! Lame jokes aside, this is pretty much the definitive representation of all those bird symbols arguably too many prison dramas have to work in, which is only fair, seeing as how Robert Stroud actually kind of looked like a bird.
0 kommentar(er)
