Version I saw: LoveFilm DVD rental
Actors: 7/10
Plot/script: 6/10
Photography/visual style: 7/10
Music/score: 7/10
Overall: 7/10
At the time of writing, one of the films vying for awards in 2021 is Mank, a movie about those who struggled for recognition around the domineering persona of one Orson Welles. In 2008, Richard Linklater created another such film.
Me and Orson Welles stars teen heartthrob Zac Efron (fresh from High School Musical stardom), former teen heartthrob Claire Danes (Romeo + Juliet, Princess Mononoke) and Zoe Kazan, and yet the title role was given to a total newcomer, Christian McKay.
Linklater is one of the most varied directors around. His core is a set of films obout the everyday, life-defining events from which ordinary lives are constructed. The Before trilogy laid the groundwork that culminated in (for me) the apotheosis of Boyhood, and arguably Slackers is in this category too. Alongside those, though, he has turned his hand to science fiction, comedy, music, crime drama, rotoscoped animation... an incredible variety of genres and media. Linklater knows film, so of course he knows Welles.
Orson Welles holds a privileged position in the annals of cinema history. Citizen Kane is often voted by critics and filmmakers as the best film of all time, and yet it is only one of a handful of Welles classics that redefined the medium. And yet, Me and Orson Welles is not one of those "films about films" that Hollywood loves. Or rather, not exactly.
This film takes us back to Welles' theatre days; he was a legend of stage as well as screen. Zac Efron plays Richard Samuels, a young hopeful caught up in the Welles whirlwind. Orson builds him up, gives him a prominent role in the play he is producing... but all while undermining and dimishing others, so that our hero Richard seems overdue a fall.
I am revealing very little of the plot there, because much of it plays out as you would expect. Everything revolves around, and is ultimately consumed by, Welles' whirlwind ego. And it takes a while to happen too; by the end, I felt little sympathy for Richard, when he faces the same fate as others around him, and yet somehow failed to predict when we, the audience, saw it coming a mile off.
This is not to say the film is bad. The 1930s were a vibrant era for New York, and the film does a great job of bringing this vibrancy to life, in its costume design, set design, music and more. The leads have bags of charisma too, and sell their parts well. We know (and knew) what Efron and Danes can do, and they do not disappoint.
McKay too fits the bill. Welles has been portrayed on screen many times, but often they amount to nothing more than impression. McKay's delivery of Holly Gent and Vincent Palmo Jr.'s debut script is something more. In this film, the narcissist Welles is the arch-manipulator. His mastery of the thespian arts is such that he can make anyone believe anything, and uses it ruthlessly to his advantage. Even when he seems sincere in praise or condemnation, it could just be more dissembly from the master of lies.
I enjoyed the film. If it is a bit lightweight, it is at least light in a good way, tripping through that middle section where not much happens. It gets off to a spicy, snappy start, and continues intelligently with a sharp smartness that reminded me a little of Aaron Sorkin's work.
I feel like Me and Orson Welles is one of those films that flatters to deceive. As producer as well as director, Linklater has put together a slick production, with excellence in most departments. The ultimate point is not a facile one either: theatre is taken as an exemplar of all the collaborative creative industries, as prone as they are to domination by a prima donna. I am just not sure the film says anything you couldn't already have worked out for yourself...
For my full review, see my independent review on Blogspot, Cinema Inferno.
At the time of writing, one of the films vying for awards in 2021 is Mank, a movie about those who struggled for recognition around the domineering persona of one Orson Welles. In 2008, Richard Linklater created another such film.
Me and Orson Welles stars teen heartthrob Zac Efron (fresh from High School Musical stardom), former teen heartthrob Claire Danes (Romeo + Juliet, Princess Mononoke) and Zoe Kazan, and yet the title role was given to a total newcomer, Christian McKay.
Linklater is one of the most varied directors around. His core is a set of films obout the everyday, life-defining events from which ordinary lives are constructed. The Before trilogy laid the groundwork that culminated in (for me) the apotheosis of Boyhood, and arguably Slackers is in this category too. Alongside those, though, he has turned his hand to science fiction, comedy, music, crime drama, rotoscoped animation... an incredible variety of genres and media. Linklater knows film, so of course he knows Welles.
Orson Welles holds a privileged position in the annals of cinema history. Citizen Kane is often voted by critics and filmmakers as the best film of all time, and yet it is only one of a handful of Welles classics that redefined the medium. And yet, Me and Orson Welles is not one of those "films about films" that Hollywood loves. Or rather, not exactly.
This film takes us back to Welles' theatre days; he was a legend of stage as well as screen. Zac Efron plays Richard Samuels, a young hopeful caught up in the Welles whirlwind. Orson builds him up, gives him a prominent role in the play he is producing... but all while undermining and dimishing others, so that our hero Richard seems overdue a fall.
I am revealing very little of the plot there, because much of it plays out as you would expect. Everything revolves around, and is ultimately consumed by, Welles' whirlwind ego. And it takes a while to happen too; by the end, I felt little sympathy for Richard, when he faces the same fate as others around him, and yet somehow failed to predict when we, the audience, saw it coming a mile off.
This is not to say the film is bad. The 1930s were a vibrant era for New York, and the film does a great job of bringing this vibrancy to life, in its costume design, set design, music and more. The leads have bags of charisma too, and sell their parts well. We know (and knew) what Efron and Danes can do, and they do not disappoint.
McKay too fits the bill. Welles has been portrayed on screen many times, but often they amount to nothing more than impression. McKay's delivery of Holly Gent and Vincent Palmo Jr.'s debut script is something more. In this film, the narcissist Welles is the arch-manipulator. His mastery of the thespian arts is such that he can make anyone believe anything, and uses it ruthlessly to his advantage. Even when he seems sincere in praise or condemnation, it could just be more dissembly from the master of lies.
I enjoyed the film. If it is a bit lightweight, it is at least light in a good way, tripping through that middle section where not much happens. It gets off to a spicy, snappy start, and continues intelligently with a sharp smartness that reminded me a little of Aaron Sorkin's work.
I feel like Me and Orson Welles is one of those films that flatters to deceive. As producer as well as director, Linklater has put together a slick production, with excellence in most departments. The ultimate point is not a facile one either: theatre is taken as an exemplar of all the collaborative creative industries, as prone as they are to domination by a prima donna. I am just not sure the film says anything you couldn't already have worked out for yourself...
For my full review, see my independent review on Blogspot, Cinema Inferno.