Remember, violent film stars are not advisable.
"Viva Caesar" brought unprecedented disappointment. The film is nothing but an empty shell of satire, with little energy or action to elevate the tension of the empty, thin story. Too many Hollywood stars are mixed in it, but they are not organically connected, just meet each other, and the playing time is poor and lacks balance. On the basis of the lack of solid character relationships, these stars are scrambling to leave their mark as long as they show their faces, but at the end of the movie, no clear point and opportunity to end the conflict, big or small. , making the movie seriously lack of climax and suspected unfinished ending, and it has become a big mess.
If even these characters can't play any role in their own destiny choices and don't care, why should the audience pay for it?
From the perspective of visual effects, there is no problem with "Long Live Caesar": the perfect costume design is complemented by Roger Deakins' powerful photography, so that every picture is full of gorgeous retro feel. Viva Caesar is also full of satire, but almost all the elements that make good satire, such as motivation, belief, character building, character development, story focus, etc., are missing.
Throughout the movie, we see several events happening, but they are all highly fragmented, just like photos. We can't see the cause, process, and development of these events, let alone the deep connections between these events. The connection, the urgency and the importance of the above, only one partial glimpse after another. The films are stylistically imitated from the different genres that were popular in the 40s and 50s, but only imitating, not clever or insightful. For example, George Clooney's character is kidnapped by left-wing screenwriters, but the scenes don't tell anything about McCarthyism and the broader context of Hollywood's blacklist, just a flashy period show.
In "Long Live Caesar," the Coen brothers spent a considerable amount of time jumping between different styles of films, characters, atmospheres, and settings, making the whole film more of a miniseries than a hundred-minute film. . This means that once the movie is over, you're likely to remember certain scenes you liked, certain actors' performances, and if you're lucky, certain lines; but when the dust settles, these sporadic humor And highlights are not enough to leave a complete and beautiful impression in the mind. In "Long Live Caesar", the Coen brothers seem to have no idea where the story is going, and they simplified the plot and didn't make good use of the actors' appearances and character relationships. It's easy to create the illusion that these big-name stars are just there to make cameos -- but that's not the case by design, and the stars are playing recurring roles. It's not really fun when a true talent like Tilda Swinton is confined to the lingering language of the lens, rushing from one look to the next.
In Viva Caesar, there is no real connection between the actors and the characters, making the characters' actions unmotivated and infectious. The dialogue between Jonah Hill and Scarlett Johansson is a prime example, where the entire scene seems out of place because of the lack of strong context.
Also an all-star light-comedy period drama, Wes Anderson's The Grand Budapest Hotel is a great example: rich and witty with lines, with a muted sense of humor; Fiennes and Tilda Swinton in both films), Wes Anderson's character is full of character and exhilaration, able to communicate with the audience at a fast pace. Viva Caesar, on the other hand, is the exact opposite: the story is often mired in boredom and uninteresting, there are only a few big scenes that have some appeal and beauty, but far from enough, and the actors' performances are a spectacle of total chaos.
Of course, this disappointment likely stems from the high expectations and standards we have of the Coen brothers. But what is certain is that Viva Caesar's apparent lack of narrative means that the story lacks cohesion, which makes the transitions between different scenes seem odd and difficult to adapt. Likewise, the film's final scene has a rather raw look that makes the irony and serious discussion seem too comical. While "Long Live Caesar" is a narrative aberration, the performances by Josh Brolin, George Clooney and newcomer Alden Ehrenreich are entertaining, set against the backdrop of the film's golden age, The sharp and humorous tearing is also a shining point.
In "Long Live Caesar", all these different storylines are fragmented and cannot be integrated. These plots are just different short stories stitched together into one giant mistake. And the needle and thread that will sew these short stories is the hero Josh Brolin. However, the events of the whole movie have nothing to do with him (in fact, it has nothing to do with anyone, the events that appear in "Long Live Caesar" are completely independent of any character's wonderful existence), and the many stars embellishing them have become Biggest waste.
Speaking of wasted roles, here are the appearance stats for each of the leading actors:
Ralph Fiennes, 2 appearances;
Scarlett Johansson, 3 appearances;
Channing Tatum, 3 appearances;
Fran Sith McDormand, only played 1 time, but it is the biggest highlight of the whole movie, no one;
poor Jonah Hill only played 1 time, ah no, 0.5 times;
Tilda Swinton, who made four appearances as a twins gossip columnist;
George Clooney, the luckiest of the bunch, still made too few appearances.
Such a strange Coen Brothers film naturally falls into a monstrosity of self-segmentation and self-inflation. Great cinematography, costumes, and sets to remind you that Viva Caesar isn't a sloppy or unfinished movie --
just, it's not a good movie.
And the Coen brothers, who wrote and directed it, really have nowhere to turn the blame this time, and can only carry it themselves.
Are there metaphors in "Long Live Caesar"? Yes, even to the point of similes: 4 major religions come together; communist screenwriters and submarines are directly analogous to Jesus, the 12 disciples, and the ascension to heaven; Scarlett Johansson's pregnancy is the transfiguration of the Holy Spirit. However, because the film has a symbolic meaning, because it is the Coen brothers, can it be slow and unexplainable and the ending is rushed? Maybe this film will one day become a model textbook for academics, but for the general public, it is better to keep it at a distance.
If you want to see a good movie about Hollywood in the 1950s, go out and turn left and look for Old White: Trumbo is watching you.
View more about Hail, Caesar! reviews
