Worst Movie of the Year

Rating: 1/10 (29 May 2001)

It would be easier to "relax and enjoy myself" if my visceral reaction wasn't one of a revulsion at the lack of originality (yes, I know how many seem to view this as "original", "brilliant", "dazzling", "visually stunning", et al more appropriately, ad nauseum]). Sticking modern pop songs in a movie about 19th century Paris doesn't cut it as original. Neither does quoting 3 different pop "definitions" of love (twice), "Love is like oxygen. Love is a many-splendored thing. Love lifts us up where we belong" and treating it within the movie as the world's most beautiful poetry while winking at the audience who know their origins. Plus for something to be visually stunning, the human eye would need to focus on an image for more than the 2-second instances Luhrmann gives the audience. All this added up to a director who was afraid to tell a story rather than a daring artist "reinventing" cinema or a movie genre. Luhrmann's use of these pop songs and quick edits were cheap devices and distractions that kept me from relating to the characters or caring for them for one second. In a word: bad; in five words: bad, bad, bad, bad, bad.