« Pitched | Main | Trip to the Post Office »

Hollywood Endings

So, okay, this is kind of an oldie-but-goodie, and it’s not what I’d call a “real” review, but I’m putting it in that category, anyway, just because it sorta is. I watched the 2004 movie The Final Cut today. For those who don’t remember or haven’t heard of it, it takes place in a not-too-distant future where people have biomechanical implants inserted into their brains at birth (or possibly before birth — it’s kind of unclear, which is one of my complaints) that turns every moment of their waking lives into video. Upon their death, editors cut pieces of your life into a nice, feature-length “rememory” (this is the movie’s word for it, not mine) for grieving friends and family members.

A nice concept with a shitload of moments that kinda rip off The Conversation, but at least they’re ripping off a good movie in the service of an interesting sci-fi premise. Unfortunately, as stated above, writer/director Omar Naim could have done a better job fleshing out the conceit of the film. He gives us the impression these chips are implanted after birth, yet on multiple occasions he treats us to footage of births (from the point of view of the baby). Although he shows us that the implant categorizes life moments (in helpful folders like “sleep,” “hygiene,” and “masturbation”), I found myself wondering how Robin Williams’ “cutter” character dealt with people’s faulty memories. Early in the film a grieving brother asks Williams to make sure to include a particular fishing trip. Is there a “fishing trips” category? All the brother can say is the summer the trip occurred. This isn’t like a three-month film shoot, which might yield 100 hours of footage; excluding eight daily hours of sleep, Williams would have to wade through about 1500 hours of footage to find this one particular trip

You’re lucky I watched this movie a week ago and don’t remember much more to nitpick about; I remember feeling a lot of frustration, but I can only distinctly remember one more nitpick with the premise. And that is: we know these chips are very expensive, but we never get a reason why Williams’ parents would take out a loan to pay for one for their son. We don’t get enough of the outside world — aside from some cartoonish protesters — to understand how this implant has changed things. Aside from a few vague references (like a hellion who turned her life around the day she found out Someone Would Be Watching), we never get a sense of this implant as a status symbol or that it’s perceived as so useful that a middle-class family would go into debt to buy one. Him having a chip is portrayed as a Big Twist (even though it’s obvious from the first scene), but nothing about the movie convinced me that he would or should have one.

Those nitpicks marred a concept that, in better hands, could have made for one of the most thought-provoking sci-fi movies in decades. They didn’t completely destroy my enjoyment of the movie. The ending did, though. If you haven’t seen the movie but still think it’ll be good, don’t read on. I’m trying to explain why you shouldn’t waste your time, so if you ignore me and see it and think it sucks — hey, I warned you.

It goes like this: Jim Caviezel plays an ex-cutter (or assistant — another thing that’s not entirely clear), who keeps showing up around Robin Williams to make vague comments that one might perceive as threats. He’s sort of like the rival sound recordist in The Conversation, the one who keeps needling Caul about teaming up or giving some information about his secret gear and his setups. Except, you know, without the subtlety or purpose. Caviezel shows up haphazardly and implies he’s aligned with these protesters now; eventually, he turns into a plot generator, demanding footage from the EYE (I’m not making that up) Corporation’s recently deceased pedophile attorney. Yeah, I’m not making that up either. They think if they expose a lawyer as some kind of liar and fraud — shocking allegations, to be sure — it will take down EYE and these implants will no longer exist.

At first Williams refuses to hand over the footage, but through a series of strange coincidences, his soon-to-be ex-girlfriend (Mira Sorvino) shoots the lawyer’s implant, destroying it and all the footage on it. Almost immediately after, we get the “Big Twist” that Williams has an implant. Offscreen, it dawns on Caviezel that if they shoot Williams and extract the chip, they can get the relevant pedo footage (from his viewing of it while editing) and save the world! So he follows Williams to an isolated cemetery (long story) and pulls a gun on him…

…and then, almost immediately, has a change of heart. He shoots the gun into the woods and whispers for him to run away. Williams stands there like a moron, at which point Caviezel’s not-at-all-menacing mercenary friend. It is seriously laughable how tiny, scrawny, and weasel-like this “tough guy” is — he’s like a modern Elisha Cook Jr., only Cook usually played unsuccessful mercenaries. This dude, whoever he is, is eminently successful in his goal of shooting Robin Williams dead.

The final scene has Caviezel frantically editing Williams’ footage and saying something vague like, “Your death won’t be for nothing!”

Here’s the problem: nothing the movie established about their relationship or Caviezel’s thin but very much existent character suggests a reason for Caviezel to back down. He’s portrayed as a guy who will do what he needs to in order to achieve a goal that’s bigger than him. We’re never given any reason to believe that he and Williams had a friendship (in fact, it seems like they were rivals when he still cut), and his backing down seems to go against what little we know about the character’s nature…

So I’m going to go ahead and blame it on Jesus. Because, you know, earlier in 2004, Jim Caviezel played Jesus in a movie that made a shitload of money. A shitload. And you can’t have Jesus, in his immediate follow-up, gun down Mork from Ork in cold blood. Or, at least, I can imagine some haggard production executive thinking that and forcing them to reshoot an ending that makes almost no sense. The Final Cut has a metric assload of problems, but nothing compared to its final moments, which undid all the good that came before it and turned a movie I would have admired for its ambition, despite its flaws, into a total piece of shit. Bravo!

I have nothing to back up my feelings on the tampered-with ending except that, from a story standpoint, the ending makes no sense. Caviezel is the heavy, not his sashaying hired gun. It comes down to the two of them, and Caviezel says throughout the entire movie, “You have to do this because it’s what’s right and it’s bigger than us,” and he bails at the very last second. Williams doesn’t run away and make it hard for him; Caviezel just pussies out for no discernible, character-motivated reason, then acts “shocked” when his pal does the dirty work for him, then goes right back to saying, “It’s bigger than us, so I’m glad we got the footage.” I would have almost accepted this ending if Caviezel had completed his change of heart by destroying Williams’ footage, as well; it still barely makes sense, but at least it’s somewhat consistent with Caviezel’s new attitude.

I know movies are as much about their marketing as anything else, but I guess I don’t look at it that way. Actors act. Caviezel can play Jesus and some nefarious protester. He’s an actor. He’s not actually Jesus, nor is he actually a guy who would gun down someone he knows in order to take down a big corporation. He should be allowed to play it like that, no matter what.

But hey, if I’m wrong and Naim intended to end the movie this way all along, it loses what little sympathy I have left. If that’s the case, it’s just shitty writing.

Posted by Stan on August 6, 2008 3:52 PM  | Permalink | Reviews | Digg It