Skip to main content

Hi, I'm the robot. She's the monster.

Colossal
(2016)

(SPOILERS) There’s usually a sinking feeling attached to any movie when you realise you’re being preached at, and by implication, it often doesn’t reflect that well on the storytelling skills of the preacher. Colossal’s a movie that works much better while you’re trying to figure out where it’s going, rather than once you know. Which means a good deal of it is very good, but also that its backend falls out.


I’m no stranger to disappointing Nacho Vigalondo movies, though, or indeed ones that are acclaimed – as Colossal has been – that didn’t quite do it for me. I was in the same boat with his debut Timecrimes. The subsequent Extraterrestrial was likeable but slight. Open Windows, I’ve yet to witness. Vigalondo was guided in his premise by his experience of GamerGate, something I’ve only really encountered through tangential editorials, and its accompanying themes of toxic masculinity and misogyny. The problem is, once these elements are foregrounded in Colossal, Vigalondo doesn’t seem to have the distance to either integrate them as fluidly as he has juggled the (bizzaro) disparate elements and tones announced thus far or resolve them in a considered, rather than showboating, manner. I’m not fond of the term SJW, but the manner in which he delivers the final third of the movie suggests his crusading instincts got the better of him.


Alcoholic Gloria (Anne Hathaway), thrown out by boyfriend Tim (Dan Stevens), returns to her hometown and promptly encounters seemingly nice, generous, retiring childhood friend Oscar (Jason Sudekis), who offers her a job at his bar. Which would seem par for the romcom course if not for the prologue scene in which a giant monster is seen in Seoul 25 years earlier. Said monster again appears in Seoul, uncannily at the points when Gloria has been out on a bender and ends up in a children’s playground. When she eventually tells her drinking buddies, including Joel (Austin Stowell) and Garth (Tim Blake Nelson), that she thinks she is unwittingly controlling the monster, they join her on site, only to discover that Oscar’s presence magics an additional giant robot into existence in the city.


There’s some very funny and well observed material during this early section. Gloria is alternatively both unsympathetic and likeable while Oscar, despite micro warning signs (he’s been tracking her life while she’s been away; he fails to empathise with the carnage wreaked on Seoul) is an affable guy who seems to genuinely want to help her out (Hathaway is expectedly strong, but Sudekis is a revelation, up to the point where one-note villainy takes over in the final stages). The metaphor of out-of-control behaviour (well, it’s too foregrounded to be called a metaphor) having wider consequences isn’t subtle but it is amusingly conveyed, and the avatar aspect fits neatly enough on those detachedly slugging it out under the cloak of the Internet rather than in the real world.


But I think the picture – ironically, as this is Vigalondo’s entire point – loses something when the focus shifts from Gloria. The director, in envisaging Oscar, said he imagined what he might be like if he’d never made it as a moviemaker and became stuck and jealously twisted in his hometown. Sudekis meanwhile, commented “I hate it when the bad guy is the bad guy from the very beginning”, but the lurch here is so extreme (and yes, I know many would say that’s the point, but it doesn’t need moustache-twirling with it; there are even photographs with Oscar’s ex’s face scratched out, which is movie textbook psycho), it feels almost polemicised. This isn’t comparable to Something Wild, say, where you can tell Ray Liotta is a powder keg from the first time you see him, but it has too much ground to make up reaching a similarly unhinged end point.


Indeed, Hathaway was given the underwhelming soundbite that this is illustrative of “why you shouldn’t give hateful men great amounts of power”, which rather reduces the picture to “Duh” motivation, as does a woman pulling herself out from under “traditional male bullshit”. So much so, that all the other men (with the possible exception of Garth) have to be arseholes to illustrate the point; Oscar is only the worst, metaphorically and literally attempting to trap her into an abusive relationship (or he will stomp on Seoul every morning). So Tim, who entirely reasonably had enough of Gloria in the first scene, is later recharacterised as an obsessive who can’t let go of her (Gloria is right to be surprised by this, as it’s something a non sequitur development). Joel, meanwhile, who has had his own one-night entanglement with her, sits by and lets Oscar launch in on her verbally, because for Gloria to regain her self-respect, the wastrel men all need to underline Vigalondo’s overstated point.


The irony of this is that Gloria loses out on proper development because the picture stops being about her solving her problems and sorting her life out and instead becomes all about Oscar, who proceeds to take over the story (again, you could argue that’s the point, but I rather think it does a disservice to your main character). It’s a prime example of a story that begins cleverly, sharply, nuanced even (even if it looks like the initial alcoholism metaphor is as clumsy as the metaphor it becomes), but then the message overtakes the telling. Vigalondo even devolves the rationale into all men being bastards because Gloria had her school project stamped on as a child; it’s unnecessarily trite that these are the seeds of Oscar’s jealousy, that she was better than him even then.


Sure, it’s understandable that Vigalondo’s distaste with the kind of behaviour and sentiments he witnessed during GamerGate have led to this narrative, but his response is disappointingly unrestrained, boorishly unsubtle, even. Such that, when Gloria figures out a way to defeat Oscar, it comes complete with a Jerry Bruckheimer or Joel Silver fist-pumping moment of her giant monster self tossing Oscar to his death after he unrepentantly screams “Put me down you bitch!” (Vigalondo partially acquiesced to Hathaway asking him to tone down Gloria’s response, but I don’t think it was enough). The scene is symptomatic of “empowerment” moments designed by men to show they’re in touch with women (cf James Cameron).


I came away thinking there were almost two movies crammed into Colossal, one of which I liked very much, the other I didn’t care for at all. One was inventive and quite clever, the other blundering and preachy. Vigalondo comes up with interesting ideas, I’ll definitely give him that. He just needs to work on the follow-through.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

You're skipping Christmas! Isn't that against the law?

Christmas with the Kranks (2004)
Ex-coke dealer Tim Allen’s underwhelming box office career is, like Vince Vaughn’s, regularly in need of a boost from an indiscriminate public willing to see any old turkey posing as a prize Christmas comedy.  He made three Santa Clauses, and here is joined by Jamie Lee Curtis as a couple planning to forgo the usual neighbourhood festivities for a cruise.

It's their place, Mac. They have a right to make of it what they can. Besides, you can't eat scenery!

Local Hero (1983)
(SPOILERS) With the space of thirty-five years, Bill Forsyth’s gentle eco-parable feels more seductive than ever. Whimsical is a word often applied to Local Hero, but one shouldn’t mistake that description for its being soft in the head, excessively sentimental or nostalgic. Tonally, in terms of painting a Scottish idyll where the locals are no slouches in the face of more cultured foreigners, the film hearkens to both Powell and Pressburger (I Know Where I’m Going!) and Ealing (Whisky Galore!), but it is very much its own beast.

The guy practically lives in a Clue board.

Knives Out (2019)
(SPOILERS) “If Agatha Christie were writing today, she’d have a character who’s an Internet troll.” There’s a slew of ifs and buts in that assertion, but it tells you a lot about where Rian Johnson is coming from with Knives Out. As in, Christie might – I mean, who can really say? – but it’s fair to suggest she wouldn’t be angling her material the way Johnson does, who for all his pronouncement that “This isn’t a message movie” is very clearly making one. He probably warrants a hesitant pass on that statement, though, to the extent that Knives Out’s commentary doesn’t ultimately overpower the whodunnit side of the plot. On the other hand, when Daniel Craig’s eccentrically accented sleuth Benoit Blanc is asked “You’re not much of a detective, are you?” the only fair response is vigorous agreement.

Those were not just ordinary people there.

Eyes Wide Shut (1999)
(SPOILERS) Eyes Wide Shut’s afterlife in the conspirasphere has become so legendary, even a recent BFI retrospective article had to acknowledge the “outlandish” suggestions that this was Kubrick’s all-out exposé of the Illuminati, an exposé so all-out it got him murdered, 24 all-important minutes excised into the bargain. At the time of its release, even as a conspiracy buff, I didn’t think the film was suggestive of anything exactly earthshattering in that regard. I was more taken with the hypnotic pace, which even more than the unsympathetic leads, made the picture stand out from its 1999 stablemates. I’m not enough of a Kubrick devotee to rewatch his oeuvre on a loop, but that initial response still largely holds true; I can quite respect those who consider Eyes Wide Shut a (or the) masterpiece from the director, but it can’t quite reach such heights for me.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

What beastly luck!

The Jungle Book (1967)
(SPOILERS) The greatest Disney animation arrived soon after Sir Walt had pegged it, but, given its consistency with, and progression from, Wolfgang Reitherman’s previous Disney entries during the decade, its difficult to believe he wouldn’t have wholeheartedly approved. The Jungle Book is a perfect Mouse House distillation of irreverence and sentiment, of modernity and classicism, of laidback narrative cohesion and vibrant, charged set pieces. And the songs are fantastic.

So much so, Jon Favreau’s new version will include reprises of The Bare Necessities and Trust in Me, in a partially motion-captured world that seems (on the surface) entirely at odds with the goofy, knowing tone Reitherman instilled in Rudyard Kipling’s classic. That wouldn’t surprise me, as Favreau’s sense of material has been increasingly erratic since the giddy high of the first Iron Man. Andy Serkis’ competing Jungle Book: Origins (despite the abject misery of its title) will be entirely perfo…