A lot of people describing this as BROADCAST NEWS lite. Why?
Loved this and just ordered the BROADCAST NEWS criterion blu-ray, why these unfavorable comparisons besides the setting?
share
I'm not sure that it is unfavourable exactly. The comparison is obvious, given the subject, but they are different types of film. BN was essentially a drama told with humour; there is nothing dramatic or at all realistic about MG. Its a fluffy comedy, and that is what it is intended to be. And a pretty good one at that IMHO. But it IS much more lightweight than Broadcast News, which treated its subject with just a touch of seriousness, and had at least a nodding acquaintance with the real world.
I thought BN was a good movie but I didn't think the characters were realistic. Holly Hunter's character was alternately maudlin and hysterical and William Hurt's character would never have wasted time on someone who seemed that immature. The Albert Brooks character was funny in a neurotic, self-involved way that didn't invite you to like him much.
In retrospect, it was a light, funny movie (not really a drama - the 'drama' seemed contrived) released in a year that needed that kind of movie.
It's been a long time since I saw it, but I think those criticisms are valid. However the fact that real people behave in a way which is different from expectations, could be also used here as an argument for rather than against realism.
I personally thought both films good, neither great, with BN probably having a slight edge. But I think its valid to say that it did have a more realistic tone, an intention at least, while MG, especially in its closing act, makes no attempt to be anything more than a fluffy comedy. But there is nothing wrong with that when its done well, and this isn't a bad job.
I also agree though that BN was the right film at the right time rather than an undisputed classic.