by Eric Blume
Adam McKay’s film Vice has been out in theaters for two weeks or so now, and as we head into Golden Globe weekend where it leads the nominations, we ought to discuss it a bit more. Here are some thoughts about the film, which do carry SPOILERS, not about story points (as unfortunately these things really happened), but about just how truly odd this film is in so many ways...
THE CREDITS: How bizarre is it that Vice breaks all usual protocol with how film credits are executed…but not even in an interestingly bizarre way (unless you count its mid film credits gag)? Tradition has it that a film has either top personnel opening credits (producers and actors, along with all major head of departments from costume to camera to editing) or almost no opening credits (sometimes just the film’s title, saving the credits for the end). Vice has 6 total credit cards at the opening of the film: Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Steve Carell, Sam Rockwell, a card that says “written and directed by Adam McKay’ and the film’s title card. That’s it. Why eschew all the other contributors? It’s neither a good nor a bad thing, just odd.
THE SETUP: The film officially starts with a card that says:
The following is a true story…or as true as it can be given that Dick Cheney is known as one of the most secretive leaders in history…but we did our fucking best.”
The only real reason for that card is to set a tone for the audience…this is a comedy, you guys! Sort of kind of. Well, okay, if there aren’t any actual laughs in this comedy, just know that we’re making a movie with attitude! The card also positions the creative team as a bunch of cool people who are super hip because they curse? Do people really find that line to be funny? At the very least, it takes you out of the movie (i.e., a self-aware tone that there’s a filmmaking team (‘we”) you should be aware of at all times), before you’re even inside of it.
THE ACTING: Does anyone else find it frustrating that no actor really has the scenes to fully flesh out a character with an arc? Sam Rockwell delivers as always in his brief handful of moments, but he’s there mostly for comic relief, not given the chance to give us a George Bush of any depth or substance. Steve Carell contributes some broad comedy work without having any actually funny lines as Donald Rumsfeld…we never get to see what makes him tick. Amy Adams starts out with a few firecracker scenes, but she disappears after them, relinquished to the background with nothing new or interesting to play.
Christian Bale is the whole show, and he gives Vice whatever power it has. But even Bale isn’t able to make full sense of Cheney as written. In the early scenes, he’s positioned as a deadbeat, unambitious loser… and there’s almost no connective tissue to help us understand how he goes from this into the brutal power player we see through the last three quarters of the movie. Bale is one of our greatest actors, and his work here features incredible physical detail and intelligence. Yet, when the film ended, I didn’t understand Cheney in any new way, as the film’s emphasis is on the events of his life, not on the characterization.
McKAY’S KITCHEN SINK APPROACH: There’s nothing Adam McKay won’t throw at you. Words on the screen that punctuate the narration. Cutaways with someone brandishing a razor. Fake end credits at the midway point. National Geographic footage. This was his style for The Big Short as well, and some people really enjoy it. I feel it lacks consistency and control. Both films are about intensely terrifying things where millions of lives are at stake, and both films are given a full bag-of-tricks 'let’s-throw-this-against-the-wall-and-see-if-it-sticks' treatment that has no unifying vision. McKay has an absurd amount of talent, for sure, but I’d argue that his direction in Anchorman and Talladega Nights, where his absurd streak can run wild on material more smartly suited for it, is superior to these two recent movies. The scene where Cheney convinces Bush to give him additional power is intercut here with fishing footage…yes, Bush is buying it hook, line, and sinker…I got it, I got it. It’s not subtle.
Vice has some dynamic moments for sure, and as a study in soullessness, it scores. But as the stakes get higher and higher and the moral compromises more disturbing, you want to be awash with feeling that never comes. Since the film has been positioned largely as a joke, it has little power, other than the grief you may personally bring to it. There’s so much brilliant talent in Vice, and I want to love it, but I’m just confused.
What's your take on Vice? Are you in the pro or con camp?