OUR CRITIC WONDERS HOW MUCH SEX AND DEATH IS GOOD FOR SCOTT
A
script written by one of the, if not the, best contemporary authors, Cormac
McCarthy. Directed by Ridley Scott. A leading cast both A-list and prodigious:
Michael Fassbender, Penelope Cruz, Javier Bardem and Brad Pitt. It seems like a
sure winner, but alas the critics have been harsh. Perhaps rightly so, as The
Counsellor is not the sum of it’s parts. But is it bad, or just odd?
McCarthy’s familiar devices appear. The Counsellor, played
by Fassbender, is our nameless protagonist who makes one bad decision from
which seemingly unavoidable consequences entangle him and his loved one. The
tragic fate characters run into isn’t played out on screen, thankfully for the
sanctity of the viewer, but the absence of an identifiable face or avatar or
symbol for the antagonists, visual or audible or whatever, voids of the film of
a lot of potential tension. I think it may be a sign of a larger issue surrounding
Scott’s more recent work.
For a graduate of the RCA, the creator of Blade Runner,
etcetera, Ridley’s more recent work has little of his creative vision. A few
inventive compositions flare up during The Counsellor, and exciting use of
lighting is quite consistent, but on the whole not often enough, and his camera
movement was rather dull. His cinematic language seems to have grown more
conservative, which is not something you’d expect of the prolific mastermind
behind Alien. I wonder if this is the issue? With so many projects constantly
going on for him, and an apparent pride in finishing his shooting schedules
early and promptly, I wonder how much love is put into the projects. The man
that battled to get the final cut on Blade Runner, to have huge sets built and
scripts re-written, against all advice, so that it was his vision on screen, I
hope it isn’t a case of churning out product now.
But, Scott is still one of the best working in Hollywood! And
I’m not sure there are many directors that could attract such a stellar cast to
such a dark, twisted and unconventional script. Of course, Cormac McCarthy’s
name is on that title page, but one has to trust the director with such words. Such
words that bounce and linger, playfully and poignantly. Such words are magic
when given to Javier Bardem and Fassbender, who get the chance to exercise the
lyrical nature of the dialogue. However, as much as I hoped this would be an
expose of Cameron Diaz’s acting chops, her blundering tone and delivery of the
words on the page feel more like a superhero baddie than sinister “McCarthian”
conniving evil. So when she scowls and pouts to declare that she is not cold in
her attitude towards loss, since “truth has no temperature,” the audience can
be easily forgiven for chuckling. And given the importance of her character, it
does the film some damage.
The film has a ‘theatre of the absurd’ atmosphere that is
embodied well into the lavish production design and tremendous and grandiose costume
design. It adds a sheen to an otherwise bleak and scary story that does exactly
what you’re not expecting – and that is truly a breathe of fresh air.
I can’t imagine this is what McCarthy envisioned as he
wrote it, but he was on set, he must be aware (and willing) for it to turn out
this way. And I’m glad it has! Should critics really be digging at the film for
its resistance to conform to regular moody thriller cinema, to deliver typical
plot describing dialogue? What we get are some powerful themes from some
horrible characters, and that is quintessentially Cormac McCarthy successfully
adapted!
So while Ridley has made a good film, one can’t help but
wonder what the Coen Brothers would have done with it. Not because they have
successfully adapted a McCarthy novel, but because the explosions of sex and
violence, greed and excess, are aesthetics and themes they handle so well and
that Scott seems to handle without much “pizazz”. But then again, this one
film, as it stands, has the most bonkers sex scene in recent cinema, and the
most brutal and outrageous murder projected on cinema screens in some time.
Comments