Plump bosoms, hardened muscles and giant monsters that beat the world to rubble and ashes. If a gigantic portion of stupidity is added to these ingredients, one is very close to good film entertainment. Or is it not?
When a woman with bobbing breasts, in tight swimwear and in slow motion, who corresponds to the current ideal of beauty, walks along a beautiful, white beach, it is primarily – hand on heart – a sight that pleases. Even against a Dwayne Johnson or Zac Efron, who are muscled, rubbed with oil and grinning in a peculiar way by the sea, there is basically nothing wrong with them. Cinema entertainment thrives on show values, even if these are beyond measure primitive. If US director Michael Dougherty’s “Godzilla” and his titan homies are added, the entertainment madness is almost complete. But even at this fragile border, where good cinema can quickly turn into outrageous nonsense, the filmmaker, with all the tricks, is quite inclined to indulge in this optical circus with an open mind.
But the pain threshold is reached when the scriptwriters seem to be of the opinion that the audience has an IQ at room temperature. There is no other way to explain the dialogues and actions of films like “Baywatch” or “Godzilla II: King of the Monsters” – both currently on Netflix and the subject of the new episode of the ntv podcast “Oscars & Raspberries”.
Marketing of cinematic hollow content
In Germany, the film adaptation of the “Lifeguards of Malibu” at the box office was not so unsuccessful. For a few days she has also been in the top ten of Netflix – which leads to the serious question: Are we entertainment masochists in this country or are we just going to be completely stupid?
Fortunately, “The Rock” itself gave a clear rebuff to all sequel hopes for “Baywatch” – should they really have existed. Here the IQ seems to level off again in the normal range. A circumstance that the viewer is not spared in “Godzilla”. “Godzilla vs. Kong” is already in the starting blocks. (Everyone who says now, you don’t have to look at the junk: movie buffs have to see and understand why a film doesn’t like it.)
It is hard to ignore the fact that many films and series are made in an ever-increasing style for an intellectually shallower audience. Of course, this type of entertainment has been around since the beginning of the moving image, but in times when streaming portals are sprouting like digital mushrooms from every crack on the Internet, the development and marketing of hollow cinematic content seems to be growing exponentially.
Nothing against beautiful people
You don’t have to demonize level entertainment per se and you can also be a big fan of Michael Bay’s third “Transformers” madness: “Dark of the Moon”, but wanting to sell the audience stupid cinema and stupid TV series as good entertainment is quite a chutzpah. Then I would like to cheer for the real banal cinema that actually only wants to entertain and does not even try to educate the viewer with bold humanistic or ecological messages.
A beautiful woman in a red swimsuit: there’s nothing wrong with that. Sex sells. By the way, the lady in the photo is called Kelly Rohrbach, actress and model and can be seen as Pamela Anderson clone chick “CJ” Parker in the “Baywatch” fiasco – even in slow motion. Nothing against beautiful people or senseless action. But that doesn’t mean that the audience has to accept it uncritically when the media stupefaction spreads rampant because filmmakers behind works like “Baywatch”, “Godzilla II” & Co. think their audience is stupid.
The detailed film criticism of “Baywatch” and “Godzilla II” by Ronny Rüsch and Axel Max can be found in the new episode of the ntv podcast “Oscars & Raspberries”, where everything about streaming services like Netflix and TVNOW can be found every Friday , Amazon Prime & Co turns.