Robert Pattinson

  • The Devil All the Time (2020)

    The Devil All the Time (2020)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Netflix Streaming, February 2021) There are films that land with a thud no matter the quality of the casting, the amount of sex and violence, or the high production values that you can throw at it, and such is the case for The Devil All the Time. Much of the problem is that writer-director Antonio Campos takes you forcefully to an ugly place and, at 139 minutes, keeps you there far longer than anyone would be willing to tolerate. Set in 1950s rural America, it’s a film that delights in the kinds of backwoods horrors best forgotten, and their accumulation looks more like a frenzied attempt to up the exploitation content than deliver a satisfying story. Apparently, rural Ohio is awash in insane preachers, rapists, ritual sacrifices, suicides and serial killers. But wait, there’s more, such as excruciatingly gritty cinematography that, for better but mostly for worse, lets you feel as if you’re stuck there for the duration. A rather good cast (including Tom Holland, Robert Pattinson, Sebastian Stan, Jason Clarke and Mia Wasikowska — with Pattinson being the most remarkable) can’t make the film any more likable. I’m not sure if the film really aims to be a backwoods Americana crime epic, but the result is just excruciating when it’s not simply too dull for words. The Devil All the Time proves to be an unusually descriptive title, especially if you focus on how long the entire thing feels.

  • Maps to the Stars (2014)

    Maps to the Stars (2014)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, January 2021) As someone who will systematically watch any movie about movies, it stands to reason that I would eventually make my way to Maps to the Stars, a Hollywood melodrama that, at least at first, appears to be about the dark underbelly of Hollywood. Director David Cronenberg, in the middle of his realistic period, turns his attention to the twisted tale of a burn victim, a screwed-up child actor, a driver, an actress chasing her dead mother, and an abusive help-help guru… plus the ghosts. So many ghosts: roughly a third of the cast is undead, popping up at various times to discuss matters with the living protagonists. It’s weird all right, but in a restrained way that owes more to incoherent melodrama than to fantastic cinema. While Cronenberg can here benefit from a striking cast (including what is, in retrospect, one of the first movies to show that Robert Pattinson would have a better career than being pigeonholed as a teen heartthrob) and a rich subject matter to treat with his usual cynicism, Maps to the Stars ends up being a substantial disappointment. Despite a wild story that eventually ends up in depraved incestuous abusive territory, my own biggest letdown was realizing how little of the story actually had anything to do with Hollywood or the movie industry: with very little retooling, the story could end up being about tech billionaires, oil magnates or Manhattan financiers without losing much of its third act. It’s about the problems of the rich and screwed up, and Hollywood is more an enabler than the main topic of discussion. Even in leaving that aside, Maps to the Stars does suffers from a lack of tonal unity and narrative coherence: the story flutters from one thing to another in a way that has more to do with TV series plotting than a sustained film. Despite the increasing sex and violence, it doesn’t build to a big satisfying narrative finale—although those who had “sex scene between Pattinson and Julianne Moore” on their movie-watching bingo card should be happy. Mia Wasikowska is curiously underutilized despite a potentially rich role, and the use of fantastic plot devices really doesn’t end up meaning much. I still like some of it—it’s rare for a film to commit so fully to tragic melodrama—, but this is really far from being the best movie possible with those elements. In other words—quirky, intriguing but neither successful nor satisfying. I’ve seen worse this week, but there’s a frustrating amount of unrealized potential in Maps to the Stars.

  • Tenet (2020)

    Tenet (2020)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Video on-Demand, January 2021) I’m favourably predisposed toward anything from writer-director Christopher Nolan, but it’s not an uncritical stance, especially when Tenet doesn’t quite manage to meet its own objectives. It’s certainly, unmistakably a Nolan film: You can quickly recognize his thematic preoccupation with time, his love for spy thrillers, his willingness to play with narrative structure and the thematic winks toward filmmaking. You can once again experience the cool palette of colours, the crisp cinematography, the bombastic score and many of his usual favourite actors. (The theatrical experience of watching Tenet was reportedly marred by inappropriate sound mixing, but that doesn’t seem to be the case on home video—and I watch movies with subtitles anyway.)  But Nolan can be too clever for his own good, and Tenet’s gimmick—reversing the time flow—is intriguing at first, then nonsensical in its details, then fascinating again when it leads to big novel action sequences, then incomprehensible again when you start asking questions. Tenet hovers perilously on the edge of disbelief, sometimes retreating to the unquestioning safety of a slam-bang action sequence, at other times hampered by its own confusion. I did love much of the first half-hour for the way it sets up a high-octane modern spy thriller, as if James Bond dove in Science Fiction and reinvigorated its formula. John David Washington makes for a good action hero, and while I’m already steadily growing more favourable to Robert Pattinson, this is the film that reassured me that he’s going to age into a great career. Elizabeth Debicki improves the longer the film goes on, ultimately getting up to Widows-level shenanigans late in the third act. Michael Caine has a terrific one-scene cameo, and Dimple Kapadia is also quite intriguing in a strong supporting role. Still, the star here is Nolan, as he builds an ambitious film that goes back and forth in its temporal narrative and delivers impressive showpieces. Fans of time-travel movies will learn to recognize the usual touches of the genre—Tenet is a film that benefits from a second watch, or reading a thorough analysis of it shortly after first viewing. The action sequence at the middle of the film is easily better than the too-chaotic conclusion that mars the third act—I recognize what Nolan was trying to do, but much of it simply appears confusing for confusion’s sake—or worse for visuals that don’t fit into the overall logic of the film. Compared to the luminous clarity of Inception, Tenet feels undercooked, leading viewers to ask questions about plausibility that are not to the film’s benefit. I still had a good time watching it, but I can’t help but remain unsatisfied by the result—it’s 75% of a great movie, and while that’s far preferable to most contemporary thrillers, it falls short of what Nolan usually delivers.

  • The Lighthouse (2019)

    The Lighthouse (2019)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Amazon Streaming, December 2020) I’m not necessarily unsympathetic to unusual cinema, but The Lighthouse clearly tested my patience through interminable lengths, sparse plotting, show-off atmosphere, uncertain genre affiliation and a downer ending. Granted, writer-director Robert Eggers has trained viewers to expect strange things from him with The Witch, and The Lighthouse is clearly in a similar genre: minimal cast, closed-off location, astonishing attention to period detail, and no happy ending in sight. Willem Defoe and Robert Pattinson star as two 1890s lighthouse keepers, isolated on an island off the coast of New England, whose rough-hewn camaraderie is tested by cabin fever, ominous portents, hallucinations and supernatural appearances. Or something like that: I use “supernatural appearances” as if this was a done deal when, in fact, this could all be a psychological drama. Naaah — movies are more fun when it’s supernatural, so supernatural is what we’ll call it. And trust me – you’ll need every bit of spare fun in order to make it through this intentionally interminable ordeal. Eggers seems intent on giving you the whole weeks-long experience, just so that you’ll sympathize with the character going stir-crazy. To be fair, Defoe and Pattinson are quite good in their roles (in fact, Defoe is absolutely terrific), their dialect is suitably thick, and the period atmosphere (even in a monochromatically shot hermetic universe like the lighthouse and its island) is so thick it’s almost oppressive. (The boxy aspect ratio certainly helps in creating confinement.) But in the end, and this despite a hefty dose of dark comedy, The Lighthouse leaves no bigger question than “So what?” Eggers clearly shot the film he wanted to, with scarcely any compromise to commercial appeal. I suppose that is something to be treasured in today’s cinematic hyper-financial obsession. But being weird and being worthwhile are not strictly aligned values. After seeing the extraordinary efforts made to make The Lighthouse off-beat and rebarbative, I’m just tempted to shrug and ask again – so what?

  • The King (2019)

    The King (2019)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Netflix Streaming, December 2020) It’s been scant hours since I’ve seen The King, and the film is already a blur of fuzzy memories, largely undistinguishable from other similar films. Telling us about Henry V’s first years in power, it’s dirty, grimy and thoroughly not fun. The acting talent is fine (what with such notables at Timothée Chalamet, Joel Edgerton, Robert Pattinson and Ben Mendelsohn) and the script relies equally on loose adaptations from historical facts and Shakespearian plays. But the result, ugh – you may want to get out on the next cold rainy day, roll yourself in the mud and spend a few days without electricity and have a more entertaining experience. It does get a bit more interesting late in the third act with a depiction of the Battle of Agincourt, but even a film as dull and gritty as The King can’t escape substantial deviation from historical fact – it’s almost as much fun to fact-check the film than watch it in the first place. It’s as featureless and generic as its title suggests – I was barely reminded of 2018’s Outlaw King (also released via Netflix), and it’s not a favourable comparison.

  • Good Time (2017)

    Good Time (2017)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Netflix Streaming, August 2018) I won’t try to soft sell it or mince my word: I strongly disliked Good Time. A dirty muddy crime drama featuring Robert Pattinson as a small-time crook trying to get his developmentally challenged brother out of trouble, it’s the kind of movie that is so unpleasant that you can’t wait for it to end. While I’m ambivalent about the film’s plot (rereading the summary on Wikipedia had me thinking that a good movie could be made from it), it’s the nightmarish execution that grates on my serves. The images are muddy and ugly; the camera can’t step away from the characters and ends up constantly in their faces. The trip through the low-class Queens underworld is more unpleasant than exhilarating, and the irritating music score doesn’t help. Just about the nicest thing I can say about the film is that, for the first time, I saw Pattinson on his own as an actor rather than being reminded of his earlier more famous role (you know the one)—With his thug attitude and facial hair, I could see the distinctive character rather than the actor. On the other hand, I’m really not that happy with the Safdies Brothers’ direction or writing—Good Time all seemed so pointless that I couldn’t wait for it to end.

  • Water for Elephants (2011)

    Water for Elephants (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, July 2017) As someone who doesn’t mind romantic movies but is easily bored with them, I’m reminded by Water for Elephants that the key to an interesting romance is largely made out of its setting. In this case, setting a relatively standard love triangle in the middle of a 1930s travelling circus feels like an instant shot of interest—watching the minutiae of a circus is fascinating to the point when it’s easy to tolerate the familiar romantic plot. None of the three main actors impress by going out of persona—Reese Witherspoon is her usual forgettable self, while Christoph Waltz genially chews scenery and Robert Pattinson continues to prove that he’s better than his Twilight character but not that far removed from it. Still, the star here is the travelling circus and its sub-culture, the details of setting up the big top every day and the challenges of trying to run a circus in depression-era America. It’s a great setting and you can lose yourself in the way the movie shows those details … before being brought to earth with the familiar love triangle featuring a good guy, a damsel in distress and an abusive husband. It wraps up satisfyingly, though, and that more than makes up for the familiar path trodden along the way. Production values are surprisingly good, and there’s a wealth of supporting characters who get a shining moment or two. I was surprised by Water for Elephants—I expected something duller and middle-of-the-road, but that was based on reading a plot summary—the actual film is far more generous than expected in its period details and richness of setting. I’ll take it.

  • Remember Me (2010)

    Remember Me (2010)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Netflix Streaming, September 2016) To be entirely honest, I started watching Remember Me knowing where it was headed, and was already predisposed to dismiss its manipulative ways. What I didn’t know is that the film doesn’t just end on a grand melodrama, but begins with one as well as the mother of one of the main characters is senselessly killed in the very first scene. It quickly gets worse, with the introduction of a mopey protagonist who spends his days moaning about his life without appreciating any of the privileges he’s given. With his dead brother, library job, quirky friend and New York City apartment, he practically checks off the grand list of insufferable protagonists. The tone thus having been set, Remember Me remains almost laughable throughout; an exercise is pushing melodrama to the breaking point where the only rational response is to dismiss the entire film as self-indulgent rubbish. Then there’s the climax, which seems overwrought even knowing what’s coming. Robert Pattinson didn’t exactly cover himself with anti-Twilight glory by starring into this film—his sullen persona is well executed but fundamentally irritating, and having more charming actors such as Pierce Brosnan run circles around him (even when nominally portrayed as antagonists) doesn’t help. I’m sure that there is an adoring public for the kind of cheap weepy drama that is Remember Me, but I’m not in that group.

  • The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2 (2012)

    The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2 (2012)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, July 2013) So there it is: the final conclusion of the Twilight “Saga”, after five seemingly-interminable films that were often more laughable than effective.  If you sense some weary resignation in the preceding statement, then you probably understand how the series divides fans from onlookers.  Fans will love it, while onlookers will wonder aloud at the series’ substantial plot holes, backward social attitudes and pacing issues.  Fans will go nuts for the overblown ending (complete with written passages of Stephenie Meyer’s novel, and a lavish slideshow of every single actors to have played in the series) while onlookers will wonder when the thing will actually end.  Plot-wise, the split of the series’ final book has taken its toll: After the events of the previous film, this one seems unsure of what to do: The villains announce their intention to come make trouble, then take weeks to come around –leaving the protagonist to mount a defense of sorts.  Various vampires with superpowers are brought in (and it’s hard not to laugh when emotionless protagonist Bella’s superpower is explained as being a really effective superpower wet blanket), various stereotypes are presented on-screen (Irish vampires with a drinking problem?  No, no, no…) and the film puts all the pieces in place for a big fake-out of a conclusion that wimps out just as it becomes interesting (and also has it both ways, almost).  Bill Condon does fine as a director with the material he’s given (he even gets to helm a large-scale special-effects sequence.), while the usual trio of Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner are up to their now-usual standards as the protagonists.  It goes without saying that this final installment, more than any others, is for the fans: If you’re still hating and watching after five movies, then there’s no helping you.

  • Cosmopolis (2012)

    Cosmopolis (2012)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Video on-demand, March 2013) The kindest thing one can say about Cospomolis is that after more than a decade spent in the wilderness of criminal realism, it’s good to see writer/director David Cronenberg go back (even partially) to weirdness and his longstanding preoccupation with the dehumanization of modern society.  From the first few highly-stylised moments, it’s obvious that Cosmopolis is not going to be your average plot-driven thriller.  Our protagonist may be a rich businessman driving around with the simple goal of getting a haircut, but the artificiality of the film is underlined at every second through fake visuals, elliptical dialogue obviously copied-and-pasted from Don Delillo’s short source novel and performances so devoid of normal emotion to make us question whether we’re truly seeing humans on-screen.  For Robert Pattinson, this isn’t a good break from the Twilight series: His performance demands such a sense of detachment that we don’t get anything resembling emotion from him, and so no perceptible shift away from a hundred-years-old dispassionate vampire.  (This is called typecasting.)  It’s a film built to dwell upon the artificiality of life among the elite and it sort-of-works, but it sure feels like it takes a long time to make its points about the coldness of technology, capitalism and/or driving around in circles.  It offers mildly thoughtful material, a few nude scenes, unexplainable plot points and an atmosphere that’s quite unlike any other film in recent memory.  As a thriller, it’s a flat one-thing-after-another framework on which to hang ideas and intercutting monologues (the characters speak a lot but rarely respond to each other) –it’s a lot more interesting as a high-concept film with strung-together sound-bites.  Still, it’s not uninteresting to watch even as an art-house experiment, and as would befit an intellectual thought-piece, a few lines may even stick in mind once the film’s performances fade away.

  • The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 (2011)

    The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, June 2012) It’s easy to be dismissive of the entire Twilight series as pop-culture fluff for teenage audiences, but the continued appeal of the franchise hints at something deeper than marketing brainwash.  While Breaking Dawn is widely acknowledged as the weakest novel in Stephenie Meyer’s series, it does continue the “romantic fears thinly transposed in fantasy terms” trend of the series so far, what with the heroine getting married, having sex and getting pregnant.  The pregnancy is terrifying enough without the addition of dueling vampires and werewolves, but that’s the kind of series this is.  After the relatively sedate and well-handled Eclipse, which was just good enough to escape ridicule, this first half of the fourth novel renews with insanity and unintentional laughter.  The birthing scene is about as well-handled as the material can be, meaning that the most ludicrous scene in the movie is the following battle between the vampires and the teddy-wolves: the CGI of the wolves is noticeably bad throughout the film, and it’s never as bad as when they’re thrown around by vampires.  The “imprinting” thing is also very… special.  Otherwise, the film plays on the same register aimed at fans of the series: The leads’ acting abilities are still as limited as ever (Kristen Stewart glowers; Robert Pattinson broods and Taylor Lautner growls), the pacing is deadly slow and the quirks of the series just sound dumb to anyone who’s not emotionally invested in the plot.  It’s made a bit more colorful due to the Brazilian honeymoon, and the more adult-oriented plot completely escapes high-school now that Bella is an unemployed pregnant newlywed.  The film still works by fits and starts, although some choices (the editing of the wedding speeches, for instance) seem jarring given the series’ demonstrated lack of interest in directorial showmanship.  Something that may not affect people who see the film without close captioning is the jarring atonality of the endless song lyrics displayed on-screen.  Oh well; if nothing else, Breaking Dawn, Part 1 feels far more self-contained than anyone would have expected from a “Part 1”: The immediate dramatic arc is more or less settled by the time the film ends, with only slight cliffhanger elements.  As for the rest, well, it’s a fair bet that no one will see this film completely cold: you will get what you expect from it.

  • Robsessed (2009)

    Robsessed (2009)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, January 2011) The adulation of teenage girls for young male heartthrobs is a gender-specific phenomenon I can’t quite understand, but I knew what I was getting into when I picked up this cheap biography of Twilight star Robert Pattinson:  Even at $0.99, I knew that I was getting ripped off, and the end result does not disappoint.  A mediocre collage of talking heads, terrible paparazzi pictures and breathless hagiography that sounds read from a tabloid profile, Robsessed is cheap celebexploitation filmmaking and it shows.  How cheap?  Well; no interviews with Patterson, scarcely any footage of him (and none whatsoever from Twilight), little original material… basically, nothing requiring real money.  Nothing else really compensates for the lack of resources: There’s no wit to the cinematography, barely any depth to the interviews (all with distant third-party sources, pundits or “superfans”) and little insight to the pop-magazine-grade writing.  The producers are as innumerate as they are exploitative: The case says the film lasts “110 minutes”, whereas it really lasts 70 (or “1:10 hours”)… not that anyone was really asking for 30 more minutes of this stuff.  The happiest surprise to the film is in seeing respected fantasy author/critic Kim Newman talk cogently about vampires and point out that Patterson-the-actor is far less important to his fans as Patterson-as-Edward-Cullen, perhaps the closest the film comes to self-awareness.  Otherwise, it goes without saying that Robsessed is practically worthless: anyone with a high-speed internet connection could come up with a better multimedia profile of Patterson by simply clicking away on search results.  Still, as audio-visual wallpaper while doing something more worthwhile (like washing dishes, or rearranging a stamp collection), Robsessed is perfect low-attention chattering.  Plus imagine the ironic hipster credentials once you start showing off the box at parties, either now or in twenty years!