From Flower Vase to Film Emperor in Hollywood

For the moment, setting aside "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World," the anticipation surrounding "The Butterfly Effect" has always been there, waiting for the movie's release with curiosity, provocation, inquiry, and fault-finding attitudes.

As Anson's first film as a producer, and with the declarations of transformation attempts in "Elephant" and "Walk the Line," one can see Anson's efforts to shed his pretty-boy image. However, the general public, consistently controlled by prejudice and discrimination, refuses to take off their colored glasses and offer objective judgment, making the spotlight on "The Butterfly Effect" increasingly intense.

This is a good thing when the movie quality is excellent; but it's also a bad thing, like right now.

"Rolling Stone," 25 out of 100: "Even Anson Wood's looks can't save such a boring movie. Dude, where's your memory? Do you lose all other memories without a diary? Is your entire life just a series of blackouts?"

"New York Post," 25 out of 100: "It wants plot and good looks, characters and good looks, acting and good looks, twists and turns, stories and reflections, all with good looks. If you just want good looks, then it has everything. Ha."

A wave of overwhelmingly negative reviews came crashing down.

The thing people had been worried about all along had finally happened, unsurprisingly.

When pretty boys and girls try to transform, or try to break free from constraints and broaden their acting range, it's often a disaster. They have everything but also have nothing, and in the end, even their good looks can't save a work that sinks to the earth's core.

Similar stories are countless in Hollywood.

Brooke Shields, Andrew McCarthy, Robert Lowe, Jessica Alba, Megan Fox, Zac Efron, and so on and so forth.

Too many to count.

Now, add Anson Wood to the list.

Film critics don't care how successful or brilliant "Catch Me If You Can" and "Spider-Man" were; if they don't like it, they don't like it, and they criticize harshly without mercy.

And, don't forget that even when "Elephant" won the Palme d'Or, its media reviews were still mixed, far from excellent.

Currently, the quality of "The Butterfly Effect" is below expectations, and negative reviews are instantly crashing down like a tsunami.

These aren't just any random media outlets; they're all authoritative media with names and reputations. Also, these aren't lukewarm negative reviews, but terrible feedback with scores of 10s and 20s.

To this extent, it can even be called "criticism."

The situation is very, very serious.

In the first batch of twenty-three media reviews, negative reviews account for nearly half, not even in the same league as "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World."

The atmosphere is grim.

Many media outlets have stated that Anson's eye for selecting scripts needs to be verified.

Before the release of "The Butterfly Effect," the media praised Anson for having a golden touch, with all of his works to date being a great success, proving him to be a discerning talent scout.

In a blink of an eye, the media are saying that Anson still needs to grow:

In previous works, Anson had no choice; the production team chose the actors, so the success of those works cannot be attributed to Anson.

"The Butterfly Effect" is Anson's first time as a producer, verifying his personal vision. Now it seems that Anson still has a long way to go.

However, this is reality, cruel and cold reality. When you succeed, everything is right; when you fail, everything is wrong.

Whether it's flattery or criticism, everything is a bubble.

The situation is indeed unfavorable; but not entirely so.

Among the twenty-three reviews, there are still four mixed reviews and nine positive reviews.

"The Village Voice," 65 out of 100.

"The film's understanding of the butterfly effect is too superficial, too straightforward, too dramatic. It's suitable for audiences who shout 'masterpiece' every time they see a 'twist,' using a bucket of popcorn to pass an afternoon.

However, the only highlight in this silly movie is Anson.

He uses his personal charm to firmly grab the audience's attention, avoiding getting lost completely in the storm. Incredibly, he delivers convincing performances in some important scenes, giving the story credibility.

Unfortunately, it's not enough to sustain me until I get to the refrigerator at home."

The "refrigerator" mentioned here refers to the refrigerator theory:

After watching a movie, if you don't realize the movie's loopholes or shortcomings until you get home and open the refrigerator, then it means the genre film is successful, and those loopholes shouldn't be the reason for criticizing the movie.

I don't like it. But I also don't hate it.

Maybe, I'll remember it because of Anson Wood."

Similarly authoritative media, similar scores, and even similar content, "Los Angeles Times" and "The Village Voice" unexpectedly reached a consensus.

Other mixed reviews are also very similar.

They generally believe that the movie's plot is too straightforward, just the most superficial understanding of the butterfly effect, which plunges the movie into a series of twists and turns, ultimately failing to explore more room for thought.

However, the actors' performances and personal charm saved the movie.

At least, the movie is still worth watching.

This is also the reason for their mixed reviews, neither good nor bad, with terrible parts and commendable parts, so they are willing to be lenient.

The scores are also hovering around the passing mark.

Things are getting interesting—

Whether it's negative or mixed reviews, the focus is entirely on Anson.

Obviously, this "pretty boy" is a double-edged sword. He can bring attention, but he also steals the spotlight, causing the success or failure of the movie to largely revolve around him alone.

To some extent, when the two directors, McKee and Eric, found Anson, they had this purpose in mind, and now it can be considered getting what they wanted.

However, the two directors were still shocked.

The script they were once confident in and proud of was actually criticized by the media as worthless. If it weren't for Anson saving some face, the negative review storm the movie encountered might have been even worse.

They originally thought that Anson was hitching a ride on their coattails, that their script was perfect, refusing others' touch and guidance, fantasizing about the media and audience being shocked and worshiping the story; but the opposite happened, and instead they were hitching a ride on Anson's coattails, relying on Anson to salvage a complete disaster.

McKee and Eric... couldn't hold on a bit.

Despite this, they took a deep breath, regained some composure, and grabbed the last straw—

So, what about the positive reviews?

In the first batch of media reviews, aren't there still nine positive reviews?