For all what's been said about this movie, I was bored through out the entire piece. Obviously this is not the typical film or film setting we would expect to see porn star Sasha Grey act in. Let alone work with acclaimed director Steven Soderbergh (Ocean's Eleven series, Traffic). There's an old cliche saying that porn stars can't act. Grey certainly would not be the exception to the rule.For all 77 minutes of this film set in 2008, the dialogue in at least one-third if not half were Chelsea's clients (played by Grey) talking and worrying about the up coming stock market crash. Excuse me for not weeping for my brotheren who are no longer reaping the financial benefits of being the rich white elite. Throughout the history of mankind money of any kind has always been a worry since it's conception. It is none more relevant here than any movie of the week, just because the clients that visit Chelsea are all wealthy white men of varying ages.
Soderbergh like his past films never finds the need to set the focus of attention on the actors themselves (nonprofessionals who often improvised their lines) while letting a scene play out in front of them, with his actors out of focus or hidden behind props. If this was from another director I might have been shocked or maybe let this drag me in, but not from Soderbergh. For an experimental film shot within two weeks for under a budget of two million dollars, the only thing that feels experimental is the budget and the time it took to film.
I've always found it interesting that filmmakers will go back and forth between making big budget films with all star casts to small independent films with random "actors." It lately has appeared to be the new trend, with Sam Mendes making "Away We Go."
ReplyDeleteI think however more interesting than that is how we continue to respect and support this directors after they bomb out with their newest experimental "art" because of their previous work...perhaps they really do need the help of a big budget and all star cast?