If Academy Award nominations were a guarantee of quality, Ryan Coogler’s Sinners, with a record sixteen, would be the greatest film of all time. The reality is that it’s arguably not as good as some of the features that never made this year’s shortlist for Best Picture. Sinners doesn’t have the depth or drama of Nuremberg or The Testament of Ann Lee, neither of which found favour with the Academy. The obvious reason for its success is that it’s a remarkable exercise in box-ticking, providing all the political and pop cultural triggers that appeal to the kind of sensibility flourishing in Hollywood today.
The film had a brief cinematic release in April last year, before reverting to home viewing platforms where it can be watched at any time. It may yet get another run on the big screen, although that’s for Warner Bros. to decide. In Australia, Sinners was a sleeper at first release, but its later success represents a triumph of global marketing as it has made inroads with an initially indifferent audience.
The aspects of the movie that appeal to reviewers who have given it a 97% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, are precisely what I saw as weaknesses. Coogler has been praised for the way he has stitched together film genres that seem completely incompatible, making Sinners a blend of musical, horror, drama and social history. As unlikely as the platypus, it’s one hell of a high wire act for any writer-director. To my mind, he doesn’t come close to pulling it off.