The Rover
0.5/4
Starring: Guy Pearce, Robert Pattinson
Rated R for Language and Some Bloody Violence
"The Rover" is one of those movies that gives independent movies a bad name. There's no plot, no character development, not much action, and plenty of characters spouting senseless profundities and staring off into space. Yep, that's entertainment!
The film takes place ten years after society collapsed, although so little is done with this idea that it could have been set in the Australian outback and only one or two lines of dialogue would change. A drifter named Eric (Pearce) has wandered into a gas station/bar/dollar store/whatever else it needs to be. Right outside, a group of criminals (thieves?) are racing down the road. One, named Henry (Scoot McNairy), has been shot in the hand and is whining about leaving his brother behind, even though everyone else thinks he was shot dead. They fight, and the car flips over. This leads to the only entertaining part of the movie, in which we see the car skid down the road on its roof at full speed while Guy Pearce doesn't even bother to look at it. The car gets stuck (how it became right side up after that, I'm not sure), so they steal another car. That car turns out to belong to Eric. Eric gets their car free and goes after them. They beat him up after a standoff. Then he goes to find Henry's brother, Rey (Pattinson), who is actually still alive. Eric forces Rey to lead him to where Henry and his gang is under the threat of death. Rey takes him.
That's the whole movie. Sad to say, the above makes it sound much more interesting than it actually is. Who in the right mind thought this would be a good idea for a movie? A short film...possibly. But a movie that pushes two hours? Not a chance. A two hour movie needs more than this to be compelling. Much more.
Guy Pearce acquits himself reasonably well under the circumstances. Pearce is a wonderful actor who is engaging to watch even in the worst movies, such as "Animal Kingdom" and "Lawless." As bad as those movies were, they were masterpieces compared to this. His co-star, Robert Pattinson, is less impressive. Pattinson has been desperately trying to leave his "Twilight" past behind him, but he's choosing bad projects. I don't think anyone saw his period piece drama, "Bel Ami" (which he starred alongside the likes of Christina Ricci, Uma Thurman, and Kristen Scott Thomas), and his first movie for David Cronenberg, "Cosmopolis," is supposedly as bad as this movie. Only "Water for Elephants" did well. I only saw the first two "Twilight" movies and this one (plus "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," although he was on screen for so little time in that movie that I don't think it counts), and I think with the right script and director, he could do a passable job as an actor. But here, with this empty script and a director whose ego is apparently as big as Wes Anderson's, he's sunk. Rey is irritating and Pattinson's performance is awkward, although that's probably the fault of the director since he seems under-directed.
I've heard that this is a neo-noir film, and it seems like it. Director David Michod is clearly trying to make a gritty movie, but the film has no sense of atmosphere. Even if it did, it would be sunk with a script where absolutely nothing happens. Seriously, the whole movie goes like this. Eric and Rey drive. They talk. They drive some more. They talk some more. And occasionally someone gets shot. That's it. That's the whole movie.
Critics have been praising this movie left and right, which the distributor is using to build anticipation. That doesn't surprise me. This is one of those bad movies that critics love just to prove to each other how smart they are. The characters talk but say nothing and without any emoting, and the film spends an unbelievable amount of time watching Guy Pearce stare intensely at something. Audiences haven't bought into it because the ones who have seen it have realized it for what it actually is: a really bad movie.
Starring: Guy Pearce, Robert Pattinson
Rated R for Language and Some Bloody Violence
"The Rover" is one of those movies that gives independent movies a bad name. There's no plot, no character development, not much action, and plenty of characters spouting senseless profundities and staring off into space. Yep, that's entertainment!
The film takes place ten years after society collapsed, although so little is done with this idea that it could have been set in the Australian outback and only one or two lines of dialogue would change. A drifter named Eric (Pearce) has wandered into a gas station/bar/dollar store/whatever else it needs to be. Right outside, a group of criminals (thieves?) are racing down the road. One, named Henry (Scoot McNairy), has been shot in the hand and is whining about leaving his brother behind, even though everyone else thinks he was shot dead. They fight, and the car flips over. This leads to the only entertaining part of the movie, in which we see the car skid down the road on its roof at full speed while Guy Pearce doesn't even bother to look at it. The car gets stuck (how it became right side up after that, I'm not sure), so they steal another car. That car turns out to belong to Eric. Eric gets their car free and goes after them. They beat him up after a standoff. Then he goes to find Henry's brother, Rey (Pattinson), who is actually still alive. Eric forces Rey to lead him to where Henry and his gang is under the threat of death. Rey takes him.
That's the whole movie. Sad to say, the above makes it sound much more interesting than it actually is. Who in the right mind thought this would be a good idea for a movie? A short film...possibly. But a movie that pushes two hours? Not a chance. A two hour movie needs more than this to be compelling. Much more.
Guy Pearce acquits himself reasonably well under the circumstances. Pearce is a wonderful actor who is engaging to watch even in the worst movies, such as "Animal Kingdom" and "Lawless." As bad as those movies were, they were masterpieces compared to this. His co-star, Robert Pattinson, is less impressive. Pattinson has been desperately trying to leave his "Twilight" past behind him, but he's choosing bad projects. I don't think anyone saw his period piece drama, "Bel Ami" (which he starred alongside the likes of Christina Ricci, Uma Thurman, and Kristen Scott Thomas), and his first movie for David Cronenberg, "Cosmopolis," is supposedly as bad as this movie. Only "Water for Elephants" did well. I only saw the first two "Twilight" movies and this one (plus "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," although he was on screen for so little time in that movie that I don't think it counts), and I think with the right script and director, he could do a passable job as an actor. But here, with this empty script and a director whose ego is apparently as big as Wes Anderson's, he's sunk. Rey is irritating and Pattinson's performance is awkward, although that's probably the fault of the director since he seems under-directed.
I've heard that this is a neo-noir film, and it seems like it. Director David Michod is clearly trying to make a gritty movie, but the film has no sense of atmosphere. Even if it did, it would be sunk with a script where absolutely nothing happens. Seriously, the whole movie goes like this. Eric and Rey drive. They talk. They drive some more. They talk some more. And occasionally someone gets shot. That's it. That's the whole movie.
Critics have been praising this movie left and right, which the distributor is using to build anticipation. That doesn't surprise me. This is one of those bad movies that critics love just to prove to each other how smart they are. The characters talk but say nothing and without any emoting, and the film spends an unbelievable amount of time watching Guy Pearce stare intensely at something. Audiences haven't bought into it because the ones who have seen it have realized it for what it actually is: a really bad movie.
Comments
Post a Comment