Woof, it was hard work getting through this one. Francis Ford Coppola, paterfamilias of a filmmaking dynasty (many of whom are a part of this mess), has been sitting on this idea for decades. The kernel comes from the Catilinarian conspiracy of 63 BCE (thanks again Wikipedia) where a Roman politician, Catalina attempted to overthrow Cicero. By transposing this story over the crumbling American Empire, Coppola is biting off a lot. You'd think if anyone can chew all this, it'd be this guy, who not only gave us the Godfather films, The Conversation and Apocalypse Now, but also paved the way for the new wave of young tearaways of US cinema in the 1970s and 80s. George Lucas, Brian De Palma, Martin Scorsese and Steven Spielberg, among others, all owe some debt to the ground-laying of Coppola.
So what happened with Megalopolis? There's a film in here but you have to clear away the extraneous clumps of dirt hanging onto the edges of it. For argument's sake, let's say the central premise of tearing down the bloated, corrupt old world and offering a new improved society for the huddled masses has potential. And let's give some props to the lead pairing of Cesar Catilina (Adam Driver) and Julia Cicero (Nathalie Emmanuel) as they have some chemistry going on. But the clumps of dirt will take a wire brush to remove. The dialogue needs fumigating, the pacing is inconsistent and the tone is all over the shop. Some of the esteemed cast play it like they're at the Old Vic; others like they're at Pinewood studios for a Carry On film.
On that cast - Driver seems to have bought into Coppola's 'vision', for better or for worse; Emmanuel tries very hard, and is generally compelling, though she disappears from the screen for lengthy stretches; Aubrey Plaza, as Wow Platinum, and Shia LeBeouf, as Clodio Pulcher, are having a right old lark; Dustin Hoffman, as Nush Berman, is collecting the pay cheque and probably doing a favour for Francis; Jon Voight, as Crassus, is enjoying the ham banquet; the list goes on - Giancarlo Esposito, Talia Shire, Jason Schwartzman, Laurence Fishburne, it certainly shows what pulling power Coppola still has (though sister Shire and nephew Schwartzman probably had little choice).
But where's the quality writing, like in his earlier work? Because this script is awful - it's all Shakespearean speeches and stagy ruminations on the future of society. As soon as Driver started the 'To be or not to be' soliloquy, I knew where this was headed. To be fair, the direction is slightly better than the writing but it all still seems like it was based on the rambling notes of a stoned uni student who's just come out of a double screening of Metropolis and Things to Come.
The pseudo-futuristic guff is also strangely reminiscent of that odd Disney (Parks) film with Clooney, Tomorrowland. Unsurprisingly though, I could have done with more of the sci-fi and less of the supercilious proselytising. Maybe this stuff flew in the late 70s when he first conceived of it but I reckon audiences these days might not appreciate all the bloviating.
Look, fair play to the geezer for spunking his own money on this vanity project - honestly, he can do what he wants. I just hope he doesn't expect people to like it. Oh, and it's not the worst film I've seen this week, either.
See also:
ANY of the above-mentioned Coppola films, to remind ourselves of his past greatness. Failing that, I'd recommend seeing nothing for a week or so. Maybe try a factory reset.
Comments
Post a Comment