“Crazy Rich Asians” has risen to critical acclaim but I feel like it wasn’t much more than a standard chick flick story with a unique packaging. I certainly didn’t hate it and would probably watch it again for Constance Wu’s performance. The film’s predictable story makes a lot of sense through the lens of Asian culture by showing how family history factors into being a potential candidate for marriage. Still, was the story really that far off from “Monster-in-Law”? It’s okay for a movie to have a predictable ending but it was easy to anticipate every step of this story. The film has a lot going for it but I still have to call it what it is: a predictable chick flick. It will never be on the same level as a groundbreaking drama like “Silver Lining’s Playbook,” even if they score within 1% of each other on Rotten Tomatoes. There is a little too much reliance on engaging the audience through the cool lifestyle of rich people (the same way that Disney drew 90’s kids into the theater with “Blank Check”) and the film would benefit from a stronger emphasis on its impressive actors. Awkwafina hits all of the right comedic notes and Gemma Chan contrasts the main love story by struggling through a toxic relationship. Meanwhile, Michelle Yeoh (of “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” fame) rises above the rest with a powerful dramatic performance as the potential mother-in-law. I applaud “Crazy Rich Asians” for its diverse casting and impressive acting, but I wouldn’t put it on the same level as an Oscar contender.
[Pictured: The cast is very good but the story is very predictable]
No comments:
Post a Comment