Skip to main content

They brought guns into a care home. They’re the Russian mafia, baby.

I Care a Lot
(2020)

(SPOILERS) And it starts so well too. J Blakeson’s movie sets out its stall as a merciless satire on greed; sociopath Marla Grayson (Rosamund Pike), from a line of sociopaths, makes her money manipulating the legal system to gain guardianship of the elderly, whom she then fleeces. Until she picks the wrong mark, that is: the mother (Dianne Wiest) of a Russian mobster (Peter Dinklage). The scenario’s potential, that of ruthless villain squaring off against ruthless villain, is fertile, and for a while I Care a Lot does indeed move along quite deliriously. And then it runs out of gas.

Marla’s narration begins with a string of cynical maxims – “Trust me, there’s no such thing as good people”; “Playing fair is a joke invented by rich people to keep the rest of us poor”; “There are two types of people in the world. The people who take and those getting took” – and proceeds to practice what she preaches as we witness her success in denying Feldstrom (Macon Blair) all access to his mother before a sympathetic judge (Isiah Whitlock Jr).

It’s a smart play, the devil posing as an angel – “This is what I do. All day, every day. I care” – and one might easily see in Marla a metaphor for the state. And not just in respect of care for the elderly, but rather, the ability to crush any and all opposition to abuse and tyranny. “Yeah, I’d fucking fight” Damian Young’s Sam Rice tells Marla in response to the prospect of being divested of all agency, freedom and wealth: “You say that, but at heart, most of us are weak, compliant and scared” she replies. That would be the world right now in a nutshell (indeed, Rice namechecks the Milgram Experiment, which proved exactly that).

The utter ruthlessness with which Marla views the elderly as commodities, selecting prospects from a range of photos on her office wall and running her business as if its dealing in real estate (which, to a degree, it is), is obviously a none-too-subtle satire of the capitalist motive. As such, Marla Grayson follows in the wake of Gordon Gekko, Patrick Bateman and Jordan Belfort. But while I Care a Lot’s conceptual audaciousness is admirable, it’s a little too accurate to be truly funny. And then there’s that, ice-cold as she is, there’s very little of “love-to-hate” about Marla, which is crucial when it comes to the third act’s developments. She and confederate Fran (Eiza Gonzalez) are so utterly devoid of empathy or basic human decency that their comeuppance is to be richly deserved. And for a while, it looks as if it will be, via a clash of soulless titans.

Dean: I’m happy for you to keep milking these poor, vulnerable people as long as you do. Well played. Hell, if your whole enterprise isn’t the perfect example of the American dream, I don’t know what is.

Dinklage is on good form as Roman Lunyov. Roman has faked his death, and that of his mother Jennifer Peterson (Wiest), in order that he may continue unchecked in the drug trade (we briefly witness his casual attitude towards human life, in reference to losing three mules in the last transit). The manner in which Marla runs rings around smirking Mob lawyer Dean (Chris Messina) is very funny (and Messina’s performance is a hoot). Wiest is outstanding as Jennifer, struggling through the sheer bewildering horror of having her home and freedom snatched away from her, denied basic rights and drugged up to the eyeballs.

Jennifer: He’ll kill you next.
Marla: I don’t lose. I won’t lose. I’m never letting you go. I own you. And I will drain you of your money, your comfort and your self respect. Because your people didn’t play by the rules.

But this is where I Care a Lot goes off the rails. It should, in the end – for it to carry any real bite – arrive at the victim’s catharsis. When Marla threatens the uncooperative Jennifer with “I can make things very bad for you” and the reply comes “Then have at it, you little crock of cunt. Have at it”, that’s the rallying cry to battle. Instead, following a had-it-coming attempted strangulation, Jennifer barely features in the rest of the picture, denied the revenge she deserves and that we, the audience, have been manoeuvred into expecting. Indeed, it’s particularly egregious that Roman and Marla should go into business together, but Jennifer never utters a disconcerted peep.

The much less impactful and de rigueur morality-play justice is served by Chekov’s Feldstrom – if a Feldstrom appears in the first act, he will be used in the last, you can bet on it – with Marla dying in Fran’s arms. There’s also something vaguely distasteful in a virtue-signalling sense in the way Blakeson appears to believe he’s promoting strong women as Fran survives an attempted Mob hit and take revenge. If he was really interested in pursuing such messages, he wouldn’t have put Jennifer in the corner. Instead, he piles absurd development upon absurd development in order to establish how unparalleled Marla is in capability (can you say Mary Sue?) This requires the Russian Mob being so inept as to botch not one but two hits and running the kind of security operation the average 7-Eleven would put to shame.

The other problem is that we’re now stuck with at least half an hour of straight thriller mechanics, which represents a serious loss of confidence for a movie that has hitherto so effectively nailed its blackly comic intentions to the mast. By the time the dust has settled, the chain of care homes partnership between Roman and Marla is a disappointingly pat development, and the justice served rather vanilla.

Blakeson directs entirely serviceably and the performances are all more than solid (with the caveat that Pike needed to appeal beyond the mere hateable, and Wiest outclasses everyone). Alicia Witt shows up as doctor (furnishing Marla with everything she needs on a prospect, “All except the test results. That wouldn’t be ethical”), and Nicholas Logan comes on like a young Crispin Glover as one of Roman’s lieutenants (the farcically botched care home break is perhaps the high point of the movie). I Care a Lot disappoints, but mainly because it promises a lot more than it cares to deliver.


Popular posts from this blog

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 1 (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Is this supposed to be me? It’s grotesque.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) (SPOILERS) I didn’t hold out much hope for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent being more than moderately tolerable. Not so much because its relatively untested director and his co-writer are mostly known in the TV sphere (and not so much for anything anyone is raving about). Although, it has to be admitted, the finished movie flourishes a degree of digital flatness typical of small-screen productions (it’s fine, but nothing more). Rather, due to the already over-tapped meta-strain of celebs showing they’re good sports about themselves. When Spike Jonze did it with John Malkovich, it was weird and different. By the time we had JCVD , not so much. And both of them are pre-dated by Arnie in Last Action Hero (“ You brought me nothing but pain ” he is told by Jack Slater). Plus, it isn’t as if Tom Gormican and Kevin Etten have much in the way of an angle on Nic; the movie’s basically there to glorify “him”, give or take a few foibles, do

Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

Witness (1985) (SPOILERS) Witness saw the advent of a relatively brief period – just over half a decade –during which Harrison Ford was willing to use his star power in an attempt to branch out. The results were mixed, and abruptly concluded when his typically too late to go where Daniel Day Lewis, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro had gone before (with at bare minimum Oscar-nominated results) – but not “ full retard ” – ended in derision with Regarding Henry . He retreated to the world of Tom Clancy, and it’s the point where his cachet began to crumble. There had always been a stolid quality beneath even his more colourful characters, but now it came to the fore. You can see something of that as John Book in Witness – despite his sole Oscar nom, it might be one of Ford’s least interesting performances of the 80s – but it scarcely matters, or that the screenplay (which won) is by turns nostalgic, reactionary, wistful and formulaic, as director Peter Weir, in his Hollywood debu

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

What’s so bad about being small? You’re not going to be small forever.

Innerspace (1987) There’s no doubt that Innerspace is a flawed movie. Joe Dante finds himself pulling in different directions, his instincts for comic subversion tempered by the need to play the romance plot straight. He tacitly acknowledges this on the DVD commentary for the film, where he notes Pauline Kael’s criticism that he was attempting to make a mainstream movie; and he was. But, as ever with Dante, it never quite turns out that way. Whereas his kids’ movies treat their protagonists earnestly, this doesn’t come so naturally with adults. I’m a bona fide devotee of Innerspace , but I can’t help but be conscious of its problems. For the most part Dante papers over the cracks; the movie hits certain keynotes of standard Hollywood prescription scripting. But his sensibility inevitably suffuses it. That, and human cartoon Martin Short (an ideal “leading man” for the director) ensure what is, at first glance just another “ Steven Spielberg Presents ” sci-fi/fantas

Get away from my burro!

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) (SPOILERS) The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is beloved by so many of the cinematic firmament’s luminaries – Stanley Kubrick, Sam Raimi, , Paul Thomas Anderson and who knows maybe also WS, Vince Gilligan, Spike Lee, Daniel Day Lewis; Oliver Stone was going to remake it – not to mention those anteriorly influential Stone Roses, that it seems foolhardy to suggest it isn’t quite all that. There’s no faulting the performances – a career best Humphrey Bogart, with director John Huston’s dad Walter stealing the movie from under him – but the greed-is-bad theme is laid on a little thick, just in case you were a bit too dim to get it yourself the first time, and Huston’s direction may be right there were it counts for the dramatics, but it’s a little too relaxed when it comes to showing the seams between Mexican location and studio.

If that small woman is small enough, she could fit behind a small tree.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 2 (SPOILERS) I can’t quite find it within myself to perform the rapturous somersaults that seem to be the prevailing response to this fourth run of the show. I’ve outlined some of my thematic issues in the Volume 1 review, largely borne out here, but the greater concern is one I’ve held since Season Two began – and this is the best run since Season One, at least as far my failing memory can account for – and that’s the purpose-built formula dictated by the Duffer Brothers. It’s there in each new Big Bad, obviously, even to the extent that this is the Big-Bad-who-binds-them-all (except the Upside Down was always there, right?) And it’s there with the resurgent emotional beats, partings, reunions and plaintively stirring music cues. I have to be really on board with a movie or show to embrace such flagrantly shameless manipulation, season after season, and I find myself increasingly immune.