The first half of Cosmopolis was almost unbelievably bad, given the talent behind it.
Robert Pattinson is a decent enough actor, but he isn't talented enough to act infinitely smarter than he is. Some relatively unintelligent actors can imitate genius and convincingly deliver highly sophisticated material without properly understanding it. Anthony Hopkins, for example, often insists that he is not particularly intelligent and that he doesn't understand the intricacies of many of the films he stars in. You'd never guess it, though. Because he's an extraordinary actor. It's not just the accent, or the beard, or the fact that both of his eyes point in the same direction (unlike the semi-retarded looking Pattinson). He establishes himself as a believable genius, by delivering sophisticated/intellectual material as if he understands it.
Water for Elephants was a decent film, despite the fact that Pattinson was cast as a doctor. The casting severely detracted from my enjoyment of the film, but I managed to suspend disbelief and get to the ending credits. He was about as convincing as a doctor, as he would have been an elephant IMO. Which, again, is not to say that he's a bad actor. He's just getting miscast into intellectual roles.
In the case of Cosmopolis, he's supposed to be a genius. Yet his delivery of the film's dialogue (which, although extremely inconsistent, certainly had it's moments) fluctuates between passable and downright laughable. It is very clear, at times, that he doesn't understand what he's saying. And Cronenberg almost gets away with this, by having practically the entire cast follow suit and deliver their dialogue in a wooden robotic fashion. But, the result is boring. It's like watching a poorly-constructed tongue-in-check lecture on the pitfalls of capitalism, delivered by a bunch of sedated Hollywood morons.
Torval, Packer's head of security, stands out as one of the only actors in the first half of the film that is human. And you might argue that's the point. That Packer and, to a certain extent, his associates, have distanced themselves from humanity so much that they've become inhuman emotionless robots. Incapable of having a connection with another person. Incapable of feeling. Etc. Which is a fair enough point to make and a valid criticism of the folks who live in ivory towers, I guess. But, practically speaking, as an audience member, I don't want to watch a bunch of robots emotionlessly lecture each other about their superficial and severely limited perspective of the world.
I couldn't help thinking of American Psycho, and Bret Easton Ellis in general. I've not read the novel that Cosmopolis was adapted from, but I imagine that it is far superior to the botched-nightmare that is the film. American Psycho could have gone the same way. Ellis is fucking difficult to adapt onto screen successfully. Although Bale's performance ranged from subtle to the opposite of subtle, it required serious acting chops to pull it off. During the quiet, repressed moments of Psycho Bale shines through. Even though the characters are often wooden, bordering on robotic, they are (subtly) sophisticated. There is something else going on.
Pattinson's character in Cosmopolis, Eric Packer, looks and acts like a bored unintelligent robot throughout practically the entire film.
Before I got to the second half of the film, I was honestly convinced that you'd tricked me into watching this atrocity just to fuck with me. Or that you were being sarcastic when you said, "i assume you didn't enjoy Cosmopolis as much as I did?" and that I'd failed to pick up on the sarcasm, mistakenly interpreting it for a serious recommendation.
Paul Giamatti steals the film, which is like stealing candy from a dead baby. (Infant fingers are quite easy to snap, even after rigor mortis kicks in.) The final act of the film isn't great, but is certainly a return to form for Cronenberg after his unfortunate departure into the dull world of mainstream shit with Viggo Mortensen.
Everything before the basketball court scene is bafflingly bad. The final act is interesting. Overall, I'd struggle to give the film more than 1 star. (Out of 5.) It is almost offensively pretentious and mind-numbingly boring. It's the sort of film that I'd expect to be produced by an artist who has lost touch with the world... and all indications are that Mr. Cronenberg, indeed, has had one too many lungfuls of smoke blown up his arse.
This is a contender for the worst Cronenberg film ever made. If I don't like "Maps to the Stars", I'm giving up on all his future endeavours. I'm already wary, since Pattinson is in the principal cast. God knows why people keep giving him roles. I guess the guy must be seriously talented at the art of felatio... ?
