James Franco Calls Out Ben Brantley

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:32am

Franco writes: Sadly Ben Brantley and the NYT have embarrassed themselves. Brantley is such a little bitch he should be working for Gawker.com instead of the paper of record. The theatre community hate him, and for good reason, he's an idiot.

Dayum

Updated On: 4/17/14 at 11:32 AM

[dreaming]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:35am

Way to keep it classy, Mr. Franco. I'm curious, when a film he's in gets a poor review, does he rant to the critic, too????

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:37am

I would be lying if I said I didn't wholeheartedly agree with Franco.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:38am

Keep it classy? We're talking about James Franco, not Julie Andrews.

And he's right.

[dreaming]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:38am

Using abusive language and then expressing it publicly is not acceptable.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:40am

Acceptable to you, you mean.

[haterobics]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:43am

"I'm curious, when a film he's in gets a poor review, does he rant to the critic, too????"

It is a vastly smaller pool of theater critics, and the ones considered "influential" within that pool are an even smaller number. For as much as people disregard his reviews, watch the threads here on opening night, and find one where people aren't asking to see what The Times said.

There isn't much of a parallel in the film world. A movie is reviewed by every newspaper, every website, etc. And even if it bombs at the theater, it has a second life streaming online or on DVD, etc. Whereas negative theater reviews can end or extend the life of shows. There's no real comparison.

The difference is Franco has multiple non-Broadway careers, so he doesn't care about sparring with Brantley, whereas no Broadway mainstay is going to start challenging him, since he's the biggest shark in their pool. Updated On: 4/17/14 at 11:43 AM

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:54am

Franco's should have just let it go. Yes, the New York Times review holds the most influence, but the show got generally good notices elsewhere. But he's coming across as entitled. Brantley isn't obligated to rave his production.

I guess a negative review from the NYT hurts the play's chances with the Tonys though, which is probably bugging Franco.

[promisespromises2]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 11:59am

Although I agree, calling someone out like accomplishes what? It not only reflects how e is as a person but it affects everyone that is affiliated with the show as well. I love that he's so passionate about theatre, but you still need to maintain a degree of professionalism, no?

[dreaming]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:01pm

Precisely. He represents that show, whether he likes it or not. He is free to have those feelings, of course, but expressing them as crudely as he did is another matter altogether.

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:02pm

It's unseemly to respond to critics, whether they give you a pan or a rave. The critics' relationships are with their readers, not those involved in the production. And it looks like Franco has just learned the hard way why most actors don't read reviews.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:03pm

I miss the days of great producers sparring with critics. David Merrick posting raves from people with the same names as the critics or Joe Papp standing in the doorway and barring Frank Rich from entering the theater before a preview.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:03pm

Franco is right, though. Regardless of what you think of Brantley's opinions, his "reviews" are getting more and more pathetic. His attempts at sassy sarcasm and wit are awful. The New York Times is too much of an influence on shows' successes to let it rest on the shoulders of a "writer" like Brantley. He has only gotten worse each season.

[Kad]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:04pm

The people calling out Brantley shouldn't be Alec Baldwin and James Franco, since they come across as looking pissy and bent out of shape for not being praised.

Brantley's reputation as a critic is increasingly muddied and his reviews are more and more informal, uninformative, and full of needless digression.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:04pm

I'm sorry but this is my favorite thing James Franco has ever done.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:17pm

Give the man a pat on the back. It needed to be said.

If Brantley can trash show after show with impugnity than an actor should be able to reciprocate in kind. Franco was not strong enough.

Bravo Mr Franco

[brdway411]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:22pm

I agree with Franco, Brantley is a little bitch. Best line of the day so far.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:24pm

An apology to the little bitches the world over for comparing them to Brantley. I respect the bitches more.

[Addison D.]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:27pm

Brantley says: "Lennie is a role that is pretty hard to get wrong, if the performer has the right physical dimensions."

I really disagree with that. Lennie strikes me as a part very easy to turn into a cardboard caricature--the shorthand version that has entered the pop-culture mainstream in, as Brantley says, everything from 'Bugs Bunny' to 'South Park'.

I thought O'Dowd gave us a beautifully nuanced depiction of a man whose mind may be simple, but whose emotional experience is complex and fascinating.

I can't help but feel that Brantley wrote his review before he saw the show.

And what the heck IS this obsession with Leighton Meester's weight? Good Heavens--I find our culture's obsession with women's body fat just mystifying and grotesque.

Updated On: 4/17/14 at 12:27 PM

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:29pm

I remember when old John Simon liked to rip peoples personal appearance in his reviews.

Searched thru the NY Magazine reviews of Ragtime, Simon said, and I quote: "BSM would be a first rate Coalhouse were he not too dapper or PALER" (meaning not black enough). He continues to put his foot in his mouth by saying "Coalhouse could have driven past the fireman without being taken as black". He also dismissed the score

To compound his putting his foot in his mouth he said "Audra was all wrong" for the part. To think this guy was a top theater critic is scary.

Updated On: 4/17/14 at 12:29 PM

[newintown]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:31pm

That response is the kind of thing you'd expect from a guest on Jerry Springer, or one of the Real Housewives of Atlanta.

Franco is old enough to know that the Times review won't affect ticket sales one bit; responding like this is just one more aspect of mainstream America's irony-free love of the stupid, mediocre, crass, and vulgar.

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:41pm

I don't think it's about ticket sales for Franco. It's about the respect and acclaim. That negative review pretty from Brantley much kills any chance of him getting a Tony nod (though I think he'd have struggled even with a positive review), kills any chance of O'Dowd beating the likes of Cranston/Washington/Rylance for Best Actor and kills any chance of the play winning Best revival. When people judge the critical success of a play, they almost always tend to look to the NYT first. It may not be entirely fair, but that's the way it's always been.

Updated On: 4/17/14 at 12:41 PM

[lovebwy]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:42pm

I get the impulse of any actor to lash out at a critic. You've worked hard on the piece, and you also get upset that your friends and follow actors have been criticized.

However, you should never under any circumstances give in to that impulse. It makes you look petty and small. Let others do it.

Love Franco. But this wasn't cool. I'm glad he deleted the message (though, of course, it's too late).

[newintown]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:42pm

Badly reviewed shows and performers have been nominated for many Tony awards. A pan from the Times doesn't mean no nomination at all.

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 4/17/14 at 12:45pm

But is this a real gay male "bitch-call-out" or is it a brilliantly ironic heterosexual appropriation of one?




James Franco: New Film Stills Updated On: 4/17/14 at 12:45 PM