(No caption)
We have no reason to doubt that Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune is a savvy film critic. But when a movie about Detroit's riot opens here during the event's 50th anniversary, we expect hometown reviews in both daily papers.
One out of two looks bad and says something sad.
The Detroit Free Press, which is delivering impressively deep and imaginative Detroit '67 coverage by staff members, takes a surprising step Friday. It publishes the Chicago critic's take on one of this summer's highest-profile feature films.
Phillips' review isn't invalid just because it's written 280 miles west of here, of course. But if any studio release deserves a hometown take, it's one about local history, policing and race. Those are Detroit-specific themes, so local perspective matters -- or should when editors decide whether to assign a review or use an outsourced one with no labor cost.
Update: Acting executive editor Jeff Taylor, who is Midwest regional editor at the USA Today Network, emails this response to our question about why the review isn't staff-written:
"We’ve dedicated a significant amount [of] coverage to the film and its local opening and put our emphasis on enterprise and providing exclusive content to our readers.
"And we included a range of reviews as part of our coverage. In addition, we focused an enormous amount of reporting and publishing resources on covering the significant anniversary of the ‘67 unrest and its place in Detroit’s history. Again, we chose to put our emphasis on great enterprise.
"We were committed to providing distinct and nuanced coverage on this important anniversary."
In fairness, it deserves to be noted that Freep coverage of Tuesday night's "Detroit" premiere here includes a comprehensive roundup of reactions, written on deadline by three reporters. And Friday's paper has a sidebar with short excerpts from six other critics' "Detroit" reviews from New York, Los Angeles and its USA Today affiliate.
Separately, the Free Press' interactive team posts July 1967 front pages, plus "live tweets" and Facebook items at the same time as riot developments events occurred -- an innovative approach earning national attention.
Will Poulter as Krauss, a Detroit cop in the film.
At The Detroit News, the new movie from director Kathryn Bigelow was reviewed Tuesday by staff entertainment writer Adam Graham, who has a mixed opinion:
Performances from the young ensemble cast are strong across the board. ... Yet in a story about people, too many of the characters are flat and undefined. “Detroit” is most effective as a mood piece, a cauldron of racial tension spilling out onto the floor, with themes that still ring true today. Individual characters don’t leave a lasting impression, but on a gut level, “Detroit” lands.
Deadline Detroit's review Monday by editor Allan Lengel praises it as "compelling and gut-wrenching."
As for the Chicago review presented to Detroit readers, Phillips doesn't love the "artfully frazzled . . . blood-stained mosaic." He writes:
I watched “Detroit” with one eye on a movie yet to be made. If anyone is ever to take on a major piece of cinematic historical fiction dealing with Chicago in August 1968, Bigelow’s “Detroit” offers intriguing signposts about what might, and might not, work.
Got it, Detroiters? A review in the Detroit Free Press says "Detroit" has guidance for a possible film about Democratic National Convention disturbances in Chicago a year after Detroit burned.
That right there is why a review of this particular movie shouldn't be outsourced.
