Film Review: ‘The Interview,’ for all its controversy, falls flat
You may have heard a thing or two about “The Interview.” Not so much about the film itself — as a work of art, good or bad, on its own merits — but about the intimidating agenda of persons or national entities unknown and about Sony Pictures’ bumbling reaction to it all.
After fits and starts, the film finally made its way to a sprinkling of offbeat indie theaters rather than AMC, Pacific Theaters, or one of the other exhibition behemoths.
If there’s anything positive in the whole affair, it’s that these venues — many of them perpetually struggling to stay afloat amid the above-said behemoths — had a few nights of packed houses. (“The Interview” may yet be packing them in somewhere, but I can testify that, at a Beverly Hills theater on a Monday night, there were no more than 30 viewers.)
The whole affair would have been a lot more satisfying if there were much positive to say about the movie itself, but, alas, even within the highly variable filmography of Seth Rogen, “The Interview” ranks somewhere in the bottom half.
On the minuscule chance that you’re unaware of the plot that created all the uproar, “The Interview” stars Rogen — who also co-wrote, co-directed, and co-produced with Evan Goldberg — as Aaron Rappaport, producer of “Skylark Tonight,” a frothy talk show hosted by the extremely dense Dave Skylark (James Franco). North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un (Randall Park) turns out to be a rabid fan and offers Dave an interview — an amazing coup for any American TV show, but with special importance for Aaron, who has regrets about giving up substantive journalism for celebrity trivia.
The CIA — in the person of the comely Agent Lacey (Lizzy Caplan) — recruits the pair to assassinate Kim with a hidden dose of poison. But Kim charms the naive Dave and convinces him that all he’s heard about North Korea is a pack of lies. Dave’s determination begins to waver.
There are a number of reasons the film would predictably tick off Kim fans. (The notion that the latter even exist is incomprehensible to the American cultural mindset, presumably including that of the filmmakers and the studio.) Perhaps because Kim is portrayed as a lying madman, compensating for his feelings of inferiority in comparison to his father and grandfather. Or perhaps because he’s shown being blown to bits. But likeliest is the general disrespect of the film’s attitude: It’s one thing to say Kim is a dictator, but it’s a step beyond to show him crying like a baby, cavorting with scantily clad women, and pooping his pants. What broad comedy directed toward teen demographics would be complete without at least one butt/poop joke? (And there are several here.)
Of course there are some funny moments. The two funniest, for better or worse, are both within the first few minutes: an adorable Korean moppet singing an ode to the supreme leader’s glory; and Dave’s interview with Eminem (playing himself). But many of the rapid-fire dialogue scenes throughout simply fall flat. Goldberg and Rogen are not Howard Hawks by a long shot (though they fared better on that count in their previous directorial collaboration, “This Is the End”).
Despite the information revealed in email leaks before the big threats, it’s still hard not to ask, “What was Sony thinking?” They deserve points for taking a risk, but lose points for not being prepared for the predictable fallout and then for floundering about as to what to do (as well as for apparently having appallingly bad cyber security).
It would have been nice if their risk had involved a better movie, but in the long view that’s beside the point. “The Interview” may be bad art, but it’s art nonetheless; one can defend its existence without defending its quality.
--
ANDY KLEIN is the film critic for Marquee. He can also be heard on “FilmWeek” on KPCC-FM (89.3).