Skip to main content

Are the bad reviews for "Obvious Child" spam, or just stupid?

There's very little I can say about Obvious Child that wouldn't just be me restating things that have already been said.  I liked the movie quite a bit.  All of the cast does a terrific job, Jenny Slate most of all, and there's a lot of heart undermining the apparent cynicism that you see at first.

The film's primary conflict is driven by the protagonist's decision to have an abortion.  (The decision is not the conflict; it's her inability to broach this subject to her love interest.)  Naturally, most of the initial buzz I heard about the movie - and continue to hear - is sagged down by politics.

So that leads me to my titular question today.  What's up with all the bad reviews?

I'm specifically referring to the ones I saw on, where I streamed the movie, but there's a similar trend on IMDb.  It's a fairly even distribution that skews high, with a totally abnormal spike in the lowest-possible rating.

The obvious answer is that this is just noise from all the folks who heard it was about abortion and got so ~~enraged~~ they had to down-vote the movie without even seeing it.  I'm aware that this is how our country works.  People with strong opinions feel obliged to take petty actions to prove some nebulous point, then wash their hands of it without even once taking context into consideration.

A lot of the bad reviews sure read that way.  Most of them have no title and were posted with the default "One Star" heading.  Virtually all of them are generic, no-content reviews like, "Didn't like it!!!" or "Not a good one!!!"

But here's the deal.

This is not me saying the movie was bad - I liked it.  But it does have that slow, indie movie pace that I can't stand.  Seems like this is what everybody does with their movies nowadays, and critics eat it up like butter.  Have a movie that would work better at seventy minutes?  Pad it out with lingering shots and forlorn looks set against downtempo music.  Insert some too-hip-for-you dialogue here and there.  Then cap it off with something quirky and call it a day.

In the context of the rest of the movie - which again, is fantastic - these are all minor complaints.  For me, they're not nearly enough to bring it down to a 1 / 5 or a 1 / 10.

I can see some people doing that, though.  When I was younger, I had all kinds of knee-jerk negative reactions to movies that I didn't totally like, especially after hearing a bunch of hype.  Look at Juno, one of the most obvious comparisons given the subject matter.  I hated Juno at first, but in retrospect, I acknowledge that it's a generally well-made movie that simply didn't resonate with me.  Ditto Lost in Translation, which I'd like to rewatch and re-evaluate at some point.  If I saw Obvious Child back then, maybe I would have rated it a 1 / 5.  Not the movie's fault; I just wasn't a patient person.

(Or consider It Follows, a movie I've kinda done this to on my blog already.  It's a well-made movie that's just not for me, but my gut reaction was, "This is terrible.")

I guess what I'm getting at is that I'd like to have enough faith in humanity to believe that the hundreds (thousands?) of people out there who took time to down-vote a decent movie are more like the cranky 20 year-old version of me than they are like that passive-aggressive douchebag down the street who keeps leaving flyers about landscaping services on your door whenever the weeds at your front steps get too tall.  I'd like to believe I live in a world where people grow up.