One of
the overlooked factors in judging the quality of a movie
is its shot length. As a (very) general rule of thumb, intelligent
movies have a longer average shot length than stupid ones.
This is, of course, something that you don’t have
to think about much when you see a movie, because the director
and editor are usually wise enough to choose what is appropriate,
but nowadays you find more movies are going for shorter
shots. About a third of the way into “Rag Tale,”
I started counting the shot lengths (that I was doing this
at all should give you an indication of the quality of the
movie). I think it would be fair to say that the average
shot length of “Rag Tale” is two seconds at
the most. Is it even possible to develop momentum or characterisation
with so many cuts? If it is, there is no evidence of it
in this movie.
“Rag
Tale” is a dark satire about a British tabloid newspaper
called, I’m afraid, ‘The Rag.’ Its editor,
Eddy Taylor (Rupert Graves), is having an affair with the
assistant editor, MJ (Jennifer Jason Leigh), who is married
to the chairman, Richard Morton (Malcolm McDowell). Morton
finds out about the relationship at the start of the film,
and Eddy, along with his staff (including characters played
by Bill Paterson, Simon Callow and John Sessions), spends
much of the movie trying to find a way to keep his job and,
hopefully, pin some scandal on Morton in the process.
The
movie’s writing is at times quite intelligent, although
it has nothing but contempt for the characters. They are
heartless and cruel and self-obsessed. An argument could
certainly be made that the characters are like this because
the movie is making a point, as is the story, which is at
times ludicrous. But although applying intelligence when
watching a movie is important, I believe you should never
let your intellect get in the way of your aesthetic response.
So let’s
think about what is happening there on the screen, rather
than the ironic, satirical twists of the tale. The camera
won’t sit still. The shots barely last two seconds.
Occasionally, the camera changes angle and goes from colour
to black and white. Perhaps half the shots in the movie
are canted angles. I like nothing more than to discover
a movie that can do something new with its visual style,
but there is nothing new about this; they’ve been
doing it in interviews on MTV for years, and it’s
annoying even there. A frantic editing style and constant
shaking and moving of the camera indicate a lack of trust
that the material can stand up on its own. This movie may
have the most irritating visual style I’ve ever seen
in a movie, and I couldn’t allow myself to get into
it at all. The cast is an impressive and accomplished one,
but you’d hardly know it to look at this movie, because
how much acting can you do if you’re being fragmented
into one-and-a-half-second shots?
To give
you a further indication of my interest in this movie, let
me present you with the notes I took during the screening.
On page one I wrote. ‘Why am I watching a music video?
Global Media Inc., the Rag, oh please. MTV been doing this
for years. Sun or Mirror?’ On page two: ‘Can’t
develop momentum, shots too short. Has contempt for characters.
I think I’m getting a headache.’ On page three:
‘Less than 2 seconds average shot. Canted shots, black
and white, irritating.’ On page four I started playing
noughts and crosses with myself.