•
Rating: From my blog.
In absolute terms and subject choice, The BFG is a highly criticizable film. What made Spielberg get into trouble with such a story? It's for children, full of tongue twisters, difficult symbolic reading, without major messages or reflections. It's a fun film for the little ones, nothing more. The BFG was a colossal flop in the United States, and this is quite worrisome because in recent years the director hasn't done very well, except for Lincoln. Moreover, it's unclear why it didn't appeal, given that the subject seemed to have all it needed to be liked, not less than Finding Dory. Steven is therefore going through a difficult phase in his relationship with the audience, but the quality of his work is undeniable: even The BFG was generally well received.
As I was saying, Spielberg's choice is criticizable, but it's also with obviously minor films like this that the quality of his cinematic vision is demonstrated. The BFG is a pause, a diversion, but it only confirms the freshness of the directorial touch of the latest Spielberg and is almost a model to follow for all those productions that intend to captivate the audience by showing them the fantastic. In fact, the visual beauty of The BFG is even more remarkable because it's never truly flaunted. Yet, one experiences instinctive pleasure in observing the different size relationships between objects, houses, people, and giants. It's emblematic when the BFG is called a dwarf by the other giants. The beauty of seeing things large and small is magnificently amplified by the camera's eye, which knows how to zoom in and out at the right moment. And when the spectacle is so inherent to the vision, there isn't much need for a story. Spielberg knows this and focuses on elements he knows are strong. The direction is impeccable, not inferior to that of the more acclaimed Bridge of Spies. One must understand the spirit of a film before criticizing it. The BFG is consistent with the essence of its story. Then it's surely legitimate to define it as minor, at times soppy, but I doubt many other directors would have managed better with this narrative material.
If some parts are excessively saccharine and the music sometimes cloying, other aspects are decidedly appreciable. The nice personality of the BFG, his language, the construction of his relationship with Sophie, as well as the action sequences and movement are delightful, simple, and clear in their lightness. Even in these moments, the filmmaker demonstrates a taste superior to the average: the jokes, the games, the brawls, the gags, everything is filtered through a vision that tends to stylize, to never diminish the magic of cinema. And then, Mark Rylance's expressions are truly wonderful.
Of course, it takes a child's heart at 70 to include five full minutes of childish gags with food and drinks that make you fart. Yet, in the theater, all the children laughed heartily, and I think that when Spielberg chooses such subjects, he does not do it out of a desire for earnings, but because he deeply respects the need for cinema to be also naive fascination, childish amusement, good feelings driven by the love for children more than by a banal view of things. With The BFG, the filmmaker decided to show without hypocrisy this childlike side of himself. Commercially, it was a failure, but artistically, I find it hard to define it as such.
Loading comments slowly
