Gerald Peary’s “Another Plea” Goes Out of Its Way Not to Criticize
By Marcus Julianus, Associate Critic
Gerald Peary’s “Fuse Film Review: Another Plea for Cormac McCarthy/Ridley Scott’s ‘The Counselor’” isn’t so much a review as it is an apology. Peary views his subject through rose-tinted glasses, arguing that there is literally nothing wrong with The Counselor despite popular sentiment to the contrary.
“Honestly,” Peary writes in his opening paragraph, “what is there not to like? Not to admire?” Those are questions for the film reviewer, not for the audience. That’s the role of the critic: to answer those questions. If Peary is unable to see his subject critically, then there’s precious little point in him writing a so-called “review” of it.
Those aren’t the last questions Peary asks in the course of his so-called review, either. The entire thing is riddled with questions, and each one makes Peary seem less like an authority on his subject and more like a confused moviegoer who didn’t quite understand what he just saw on the screen.
Peary’s prose leaves much to be desired as well. There are confusing sentence fragments, lame colloquialisms, and forced references to other films that don’t quite make sense. Combined with the aforementioned sense of confusion and lack of critical focus, this is all bound to make readers of Another Plea plead for it to be over already.