Vulgar auteurism: a never ending cycle

This will be an informal essay without citations or links. Basically, source: just trust me bro.

In the 2010s, a group of online film writers decided to reevaluate blockbuster filmmakers. This was supposed to be our modern Cahiers du Cinema, the film critics who brought us The French New Wave. They re-evaluated Hollywood directors from the 40s and 50s, filmmakers who were thought of only as making commercial entertainment. They're the reason that filmmakers like Alfred Hitchcock, Howard Hawks, and Nicolas Ray are now held in high esteem. They're also the reason why Citizen Kane is so revered today.

Critics from The Village Voice and The A.V. Club became proponents of this "new" auteur theory. Vulgar auteurism, which focused on a type of broad filmmaking distinguishing itself from prestige auteurs. It brought up filmmakers such as Michael Mann, who already had acclaim contemporarily, into the realm of one of the great filmmakers. It also brought up filmmakers that weren't acclaimed during their time, such as Tony Scott, who is now held in high regard and in some cases held in higher regard than his more prestige-oriented brother, Ridley Scott.

As time has gone on, this now applies to filmmakers such as Michael Bay, who has made a critical comeback after his Transformers movies with his 2022 film Ambulance, and M. Night Shyamalan, who started losing prestige throughout the 21st century. Movies from Shyamalan, such as The Village, The Happening, and After Earth are now held in higher regard than they were back during their releases.

Now that I have that out of the way, I wanted to bring up something as it's happening. While certain popcorn movies are now acclaimed (John Wick: Chapter 4 and Top Gun: Maverick being recent examples), there are still directors that are currently not being regarded highly that will likely meet a fate similar to Bay, Shyamalan, and Scott. I'm thinking of David Leitch, who received mixed-negative reception with his film Bullet Train while receiving positive albeit tepid reception with his follow-up The Fall Guy. Leitch is an auteur, much like Bay. His work on Deadpool 2 feels like him, even his film Hobbs and Shaw feels different than the other Fast and Furious franchise (although not to the same degree). Bullet Train was a relative box office hit at the time, but it's reached cult-classic status. Most people will probably know what movie you're talking about if you bring it up. It has a large presence on TikTok and other social media platforms. It simply lives in the culture. It contains the highly stylized, technically proficient action of films from Bay and Scott that were not well-liked by critics at the time. The same 20 and 30-something-year-olds who love Shyamalan today but despise Leitch will be in for a shock in ten years' time when the 20-something year olds who grew up with Bullet Train hold it in high regard like these people do Bad Boys II or Pain and Gain.

Another filmmaker who falls into this is Adam McKay. Much like Shyamalan, McKay received immense acclaim and prestige for his film The Big Short. Even films that weren't so acclaimed by critics at the time, such as Step-Brothers and The Other Guys, are held in high regard today as comedy masterpieces. So, what then of his critical reception on his last two films, Vice and Don't Look Up. Yes, they received Best Picture nominations, but they have become punching bags for these same film critics who loved Shyamalan's Trap. Don't Look Up specifically gets considered a terrible film. These aren't action films, so why am I bringing it up? McKay exhibits a loud and vulgar style in these films. He breaks the fourth wall constantly, interrupts the flow of scenes with freeze frames and insert shots. The editing in his films feels chaotic. So while this loud and vulgar style is accepted with filmmakers such as Scott, it seems like it's a bridge too far here. So I would not be surprised if McKay and Don't Look Up, which was one of the most-watched films on Netflix of all time, meet a similar reassessment period as the other films I've mentioned.

I didn't have much of a point to this other than to notice this pattern, even from critics and film lovers who seem to hold the theory to heart. And for some reason can't notice what's in front of them.