Skip to main content

Everyone's gotta do the Shimmy Shimmy Ya.

Lost River
(2014)

(SPOILERS) If more actors than one might expect turn out to be competent directors, it’s probably because the majority of them have very conservative ambitions in the field. The ones with the virtuosity of, say, Mel Gibson are few and far between. Much more common is the unfussy, unadorned approach of a Clint or a (Sir) Dickie (albeit less prolific in output). Those who attempt overt artistic or personal statements set themselves up for a fall, which is where the latest first-timer, Ryan Gosling, comes in. Lost River has been thoroughly lambasted, and it has to be said that it isn’t very good.


But hey, at least Gosling didn’t go down the route of respectable period piece or biopic (see Russell Crowe, Angelina Jolie, etc.) Lost River is determinedly weird, in the overt way a student filmmaker full of ideas but with little self-control is (hence the multi-hyphenate director-writer-producer). Whether he’ll be a one-time only, defeated by pillorying the way Johnny Depp was with The Brave, or even Charles Laughton, who made a classic but was defeated by its reception, remains to be seen. Lost River feels like a movie made from watching the works of other, better filmmakers (David Lynch, Nicolas Winding Refn, Terry Gilliam, all great touchstones to have) but without a sufficient clarity on what it wants to be. Other than weird.


Because it’s certainly that, just not in a terribly interesting way. The English guy off Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (the majority of the leads are British playing American, for no tangible reason, at least not in a “best person for the part” sense), Iain De Caestecker is Bones, who lives with mum Billy (Christina Hendricks) in a derelict part of Detroit. He salvages scrap metal, while she takes a weird stage act job from a predatory bank manager (Ben Mendelsohn, surprisingly playing a wanker, one with only the one good ear, which at least marks him out from all the other wankers he plays) in order to make the mortgage repayments to stop their house from being pulled down. 


Also in the mix are Matt Smith’s imaginatively named Bully, a psychopath who terrorises the rundown locale, and Rat (Saoirise Ronan), Bones’ kind-of romantic interest who lives with her gran and owns a rat (called Nick, which makes sense, as Nick would be a silly name for a girl).


It’s a picture of two halves, the more interesting of which is the peculiar club scene Billy becomes involved in. Her first visit sees her witness a Grand Guignol performance murder to an ecstatic audience, and soon she is peeling of her face to rapturous applause (do you think this might be Gosling’s commentary on the 99% addicted to TV and the Internet, escaping their rum lots, maybe? Hmmmm?) The star performer Cat (Eva Mendes, who isn’t, but is Gosling’s paramour) introduces Billy to the basement shows, where she is sealed in a plastic body shell while a paying audience (guess who that will be) is free to behave as they will. This half-light world has the colour scheme of a Refn film and the surrealism and sexual fetishism of Lynch (think Blue Velvet) but what it lacks is any real sensibility beyond a will to odd. Lynch’s twisted sense of humour marbles his work, but Gosling is disappointingly po-faced.


Bones is involved in a different kind of escapism, one that summons the fantasising protagonists of Gilliam’s The Fisher King and Tideland; Rat informs him a nearby town was flooded to build a reservoir, and that a curse can be lifted by capturing a beast from its depths. Gosling fails to elicit any interest in this plotline, however. Indeed, the only aspect that passes mention is how glaringly unsuited Smith is to the “villain” role, pratting about, shouting like a gumby, and, in a particularly unpleasant sequence, decapitating a rat (that’s Nick, not Rat).


Tonally the picture lurches from twee sentimentalism (the TV shows suggest Jean Pierre Jeunet) to threats of violence and bloodshed (that would Refn again), without any guiding sensibility to bind them. Mainly though, Gosing’s story just isn’t any cop. If he had a really good one, he might make something interesting at some point, as there are more than enough moments and images here to suggest someone with far more potential than a purveyor of personality-free period pics or adapted works. If he’s going to be an indulgent filmmaker, though, he needs to work on why people should indulge him (even if that amounts to the scars from serving as a Mouseketeer). With the likes of Gilliam and Lynch, no one ever has to ask that question.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Something something trident.

Aquaman (2018)
(SPOILERS) If Aquaman has a problem – although it actually has two – it’s the problem of the bloated blockbuster. There's just too much of it. And the more-more-more element eventual becomes wearing, even when most of that more-more-more is, on a scene-by-scene basis, terrifically executed. If there's one thing this movie proves above all else, it's that you can let director James Wan loose in any given sandpit and he’ll make an above-and-beyond castle out of it. Aquaman isn't a classic, but it isn’t for want of his trying.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

You look like an angry lizard!

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)
(SPOILERS) I can quite see a Queen fan begrudging this latest musical biopic for failing to adhere to the facts of their illustrious career – but then, what biopic does steer a straight and true course? – making it ironic that they're the main fuel for Bohemian Rhapsody's box office success. Most other criticisms – and they're legitimate, on the whole – fall away in the face of a hugely charismatic star turn from Rami Malek as the band's frontman. He's the difference between a standard-issue, episodic, join-the-dots narrative and one that occasionally touches greatness, and most importantly, carries emotional heft.

The wolves are running. Perhaps you would do something to stop their bite?

The Box of Delights (1984)
If you were at a formative age when it was first broadcast, a festive viewing of The Box of Delights may well have become an annual ritual. The BBC adaptation of John Masefield’s 1935 novel is perhaps the ultimate cosy yuletide treat. On a TV screen, at any rate. To an extent, this is exactly the kind of unashamedly middle class-orientated bread-and-butter period production the corporation now thinks twice about; ever so posh kids having jolly adventures in a nostalgic netherworld of Interwar Britannia. Fortunately, there’s more to it than that. There is something genuinely evocative about Box’s mythic landscape, a place where dream and reality and time and place are unfixed and where Christmas is guaranteed a blanket of thick snow. Key to this is the atmosphere instilled by director Renny Rye. Most BBC fantasy fare doe not age well but The Box of Delights is blessed with a sinister-yet-familiar charm, such that even the creakier production decisions may be vi…

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Along with Pain & Gain and The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street might be viewed as the completion of a loose 2013 trilogy on the subject of success and excess; the American Dream gone awry. It’s the superior picture to its fellows, by turns enthralling, absurd, outrageous and hilarious. This is the fieriest, most deliriously vibrant picture from the director since the millennium turned. Nevertheless, stood in the company of Goodfellas, the Martin Scorsese film from which The Wolf of Wall Street consciously takes many of its cues, it is found wanting.

I was vaguely familiar with the title, not because I knew much about Jordan Belfort but because the script had been in development for such a long time (Ridley Scott was attached at one time). So part of the pleasure of the film is discovering how widely the story diverges from the Wall Street template. “The Wolf of Wall Street” suggests one who towers over the city like a behemoth, rather than a guy …

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

Mountains are old, but they're still green.

Roma (2018)
(SPOILERS) Roma is a critics' darling and a shoe-in for Best Foreign Film Oscar, with the potential to take the big prize to boot, but it left me profoundly indifferent, its elusive majesty remaining determinedly out of reach. Perhaps that's down to generally spurning autobiographical nostalgia fests – complete with 65mm widescreen black and white, so it's quite clear to viewers that the director’s childhood reverie equates to the classics of old – or maybe the elliptical characterisation just didn't grab me, but Alfonso Cuarón's latest amounts to little more than a sliver of substance beneath all that style.