Directed
By:
David Cronenberg (A Dangerous Method)
Starring: Robert Pattinson,
Paul Giamatti, Juliette Binoche, Samantha Morton
Rated: R for some strong
sexual content including graphic nudity, violence and language
Run
Time:
1 hour, 49 minutes
Synopsis: Billionaire asset
manager Eric Parker (Pattinson) wants to get a haircut, so he rides in his limo
all day and night while he holds business meetings and sexual affairs…all while
losing billions because of a colossal mistake he made. Because of this and
various threats throughout the day his life begins to unravel.
REVIEW
Andrew: Hello readers! Last night
we went with a couple of friends to a movie theatre in Hartford that shows
independent films and caught a showing of David Cronenberg’s latest, Cosmopolis.
It stars Robert Pattinson (Twilight) as Eric Parker, a young,
financial-whiz billionaire, and has some other recognizable names such as Paul
Giamatti (Sideways), Juliette Binoche (Chocolat) and Jay
Baruchel (Knocked Up).
But for the most part it’s JUST Pattinson and
someone else (it changes throughout) riding in his stretch limo across
Manhattan as he’s dead-set on getting a haircut on the worst day possible for
numerous reasons.
Sarah: Amongst them are the
President visiting the city, a protest riot breaking out, a dead rapper’s
funeral procession and some threats out on Eric’s life.
A: Exactly. So this is
one that caught our attention in a few ways – you saw some clips on Good
Morning America, I saw the trailer online, we like Cronenberg’s other
stuff such as the recent A Dangerous Method, and of course we
were curious to see how Pattinson did in a sort of post-Twilight role.
So now that we’ve seen Cosmopolis what are your
thoughts?
S: It was AWFUL. It was
the biggest waste of my time I’ve ever experienced at a movie theatre. When I
start breaking my own rules and bust out my phone just to stay awake or to keep
myself from leaving the theatre? That’s about as low as you can get.
Readers, just so you know, the only reason I
stayed and watched the whole thing was so we could do this review. That’s the
ONLY reason I wasn’t like, “Dude, we need to leave.”
A: I completely agree.
And first, apologies to Beasts of the Southern Wild because
we thought THAT movie was pretentious and was making us fall asleep and wanting
to walk out, it ain’t got NOTHIN’ on Cosmopolis. Holy crap.
I was honestly THIS CLOSE to getting up,
walking out and saying I can’t take any more of this. Because not only was it
boring to me but it was über-pretentious. Now, I know the film is an adaptation
of a 2003 novel by Don DeLillo, so I’m sure a lot of the dialogue comes
straight from the book or is adapted very close to it, but it’s just that the
dialogue was either going over my head or was boring as sin because it’s about
cyber-business and Pattinson’s Parker just blathering on about existential
crap.
 |
| No, seriously, he gets a haircut. And the discussion between the barber and Pattinson's driver is absolute drivel about taxi driving. Ugh. |
Seriously, when he just starts asking
questions and his underlings always say they’re afraid he’ll no longer respect
them because of their answer, or his repeatedly asking his wife to have sex,
whom by the way, he JUST married and only because they’re both from rich
families…just the whole thing is incredibly pointless. And readers, again, if
you could tell us what you think of the movie and tell us what we were missing,
I’m all for it. I’d love to know because I really wish we had our $22 back.
S: At least when we saw
Beasts
of the Southern Wild we were glad we had seen it because it was Oscar bait.
Cosmopolis
is not Oscar-worthy whatsoever. In my mind there was no point in making this
movie. When movies are brought from book to screen and sometimes it’s a little
rough but still kind of works? That’s ok. But Cosmopolis brought
nothing worthwhile to the screen. It didn’t need to be made.
A: Now don’t get me
wrong, I get the basic premise here. Parker is a rich…
S: Self-loathing…
A: Whiz-kid who has way
too much money to know or care what to do with it because he’s always had it;
he’s desensitized to life in general. So here he wants to go get a haircut all
the way across town because why not? Ok…and he doesn’t care that it’s a crazy
day, and oh look he keeps running in to his wife. And did you notice he only
ever ran in to his new wife…
S: At meal times? Yeah.
Stupid.
A: Exactly. Oh, and he
has two threats out on his life, one that may be more serious than the other
and when it gets right down to it the film turns into an analogy to the Greek
myth of Icharus. How’s that? Because he flown so high in business but now can’t
figure out the yuan and he’s losing billions in one day. Could it be any more
heavy-handed?
So I get it. He’s falling from grace and
couldn’t care less because it makes him feel “free.” It’s almost like the old
Michael Douglas movie Falling Down, where it’s about a guy
whose life is just collapsing and he doesn’t give a crap anymore and so he
starts acting out in a very destructive way.
So I get it, but I agree with you, it was
pointless. The ruminations going on throughout the film destroyed it for me. I
get that Pattinson was probably perfect for the part because his bland delivery
and icy-cold stare was perfect for his character, but it made for a terrible
movie-watching experience.
S: Yes it did. It was
just bad. It was so pretentious that it has probably blocked out 99% of the
audience that has gone to see it in theatres. Any normal crowd that would go
see this will probably get offended that it’s so difficult to understand or
care about what’s going on on-screen.
A: Everyone on-screen
just goes on and on and on…ugh. Now I’m not going to completely bash the film
because there are a couple of things I did like about it. For example it looks
great.
 |
| The secret to the meaning of Cosmopolis occurs just seconds after this scene. It's one of the few scenes worth mentioning. |
S: The cinematography
was very good. The camera angles were different and distinct, if a little too
artsy at times, and the interior of the limousine was very cool.
A: So it looked good
and then Paul Giamatti is the one bright spot as far as the acting goes.
Probably because he’s just the best actor involved in the whole thing and kind
of gave it a jolt at the end of the film, but even then he blathers on about
some stupid stuff.
Ok, here’s an example of how bad the dialogue
is - at one point in the climax of the film Pattinson has just purposefully
hurt himself and Giamatti gives him some towels to stop the bleeding. It’s a
shocking bit of action for a second, but then this exchange occurs:
Pattinson: “My prostate is asymmetrical.”
Giamatti: “So is mine.”
Pattinson: “What does it mean?”
Giamatti: “Nothing. It means nothing.”
And THAT, dear readers, is the movie in a
nutshell. It all means NOTHING. Cosmopolis is trash and you couldn’t
pay me to watch it again.
S: We’ll never see this
film again. Don’t waste your time with it, even on a rainy day if it’s on the
Independent Film Channel.
FINAL
VERDICT:
For
the love of all that is holy, skip it!
 |
| (Out of Five clapboards) |
