Maps to the Stars

By no stretch of the imagination do I think that this is a home run. Not at all. It's very messy, and many times each storyline strains to connect. However, there's still a sense of real fascination under it all. Messy, but also very interesting at times. If anything, the film would have worked more if the performances were more in-line with the obviously funny material at the core. The one actor to truly get it is Julianne Moore, who is easily the best performer here. She seems to have a helluva time, funny and wickedly offbeat, even if over-the-top in a way that works. She really does rise the film above what the script entails. Great performance

If you've seen any of David Cronenberg's movies, then you should know that his movies contain some nasty material. "Maps to the Stars" is no exception, but this one features a different kind of nastiness. Cronenberg's previous movies showed things like mutated children, exploding heads, a man turning into a fly, a drug addict's hallucinations, and the revelation of a family man's former occupation. "Maps to the Stars" features a scene that looks very much like a scene in a Cronenberg movie, but most of the violence here is emotional violence. Every character is REALLY screwed up. That's to be expected in a movie about Hollywood, but Julianne Moore's character is like a knife against your face.

In the end I thought that it was a good movie, but not a great one. The whole movie is like a kick in the gut, so I should remind you that it's not for the fainthearted (no Cronenberg movie is).

Anyone worried that a David Cronenberg film about the inner workings of Hollywood would not be filled with copious amounts of ick, rest assured. The ick abounds in "Maps to the Stars," a fascinating film that must be something like what watching a grisly car accident in slow motion would feel like.

Julianne Moore won her Oscar for the bland and award-bait "Still Alice" last year, but THIS is the movie for which she should have won. Utterly lacking in vanity, Moore tears into the role of a washed up actress struggling night and day to stage her comeback. Think Norma Desmond without the black and white studio sheen of "Sunset Boulevard" and the filters that were necessarily in place back when Billy Wilder's dark satire was released. This film is like rummaging through Norma Desmond's underwear. Mia Wasikowska is great as well as Moore's hanger on and personal assistant who unravels and goes off the deep end and beyond. Swirling around these two characters are plot lines involving a troubled child star, lots and lots of incest, and enough frantic desperation to fill a sequel to "Mulholland Drive."

Whenever I see a movie like this, I immediately wonder how true it is vs. how exaggerated for effect. For example, did Halle Berry or Nicole Kidman at one point in their careers have to subject themselves to the indignities shown or implied in this film? But then I think there has to be a lot of truth to movies like this, "Mulholland Drive," etc., which makes me glad I decided to be an anonymous Joe as opposed to a superstar. For every Julia Roberts, there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of desperate people out there waiting for the big break that will never come, or who can't handle it when it eventually does.

Grade: A-

We used to expect gross-out horror from David Cronenberg. Now he gives us weird and weirder. MAPS TO THE STARS is set in a Tinseltown of designer homes, designer shops and exclusive restaurants. The background 'sheen' is reminiscent of an Almodovar movie, plus there's a Gothic element borrowed from Shyamalan (Agatha and Benjie see dead people). Julianne Moore's performance is in the kind of hyper-drive she brought to BOOGIE NIGHTS, which helps to power the movie's gearshift from Hollywood satire into violent melodrama. One of the themes is incest, which surely needed a deeper and subtler exploration.

Robert Pattinson takes another step away from the Twilight Zone in the role of a limo driver with screen writing aspirations (like every other chauffeur in Los Angeles). Cronenberg is clearly reaching out towards a more discerning class of viewer. MAPS TO THE STARS is very much an 'auteur' movie, highly intelligent and stylized, but perhaps perched uncomfortably between satire and psychodrama.

Most of David Cronenberg's films range from good to outstanding. Some of his work disappointed me or evoked a relatively mixed reaction from me, but on the most part he is a very interesting director who does stand out in a good way. The cast are very talented, Julianne Moore especially, while one can understand why Cronenberg frequently used Howard Shore as his composer of choice and their collaborations is one of the best and most consistent director-composer collaborations in my view (am especially fond of his work for 'The Fly').

It is said with sadness that despite hearing good things about it (though it's understandably very polarising here), 'Maps to the Stars' disappointed me. It is far from a terrible film, don't even think it's a bad film, but it for me was a long way from great. Much to admire but do have to share some of the criticisms here, a great concept with inconsistent execution of it. As far as Cronenberg's work goes, 'Maps to the Stars' is better than 'Stereo', 'Crimes of the Future' and 'Cosmopolis' but it is a lesser film of his, nowhere near the level of 'The Fly', 'Dead Ringers', 'Eastern Promises', 'A History of Violence' and 'Spider'.

There are good things with 'Maps to the Stars'. It looks wonderful, excepting the somewhat fake-looking fire, then again it is Cronenberg whose work from the late 1970s onwards always ranked high on a visual level (of his overall output 'Rabid' and 'Shivers' were the only real exceptions in this regard). The cinematography is stylish and quite stunning to look at, sunshine has rarely blazed in such a wonderfully dazzling way in film. Shore's score is subtly unsettling and Cronenberg does deliver in the visual aspect of his directing.

Some of the satire is fiercely sharp and darkly funny and it is the satire where 'Maps to the Stars' fares best. Really admired the cast here, with Moore being excellent in the lead in her best performance in years (perhaps since 'Boogie Nights'). Evan Bird shows himself to be a young actor with huge potential, a very beyond his years performance. Have not seen a better performance from Mia Wasikowska in her most daring role and she is very affecting in it, seeing John Cusack and Olivia Williams in different roles and excelling was great to see. Robert Pattinson is much better than he was in 'Cosmopolis' and as others have said he has come on a long way since 'Twilight'.

For all those great things, 'Maps to the Stars' just didn't connect with me. Despite a promising start, there is a major change of tone that jars badly and then the film becomes unfocused and rather strange. The satirical edge is done well, but the vulgarity does get very over-the-top and mean-spirited and the cynical edge is overdone at times too. The more surreal elements didn't come over as either dreamlike or nightmarish, not much eerie here, too much of the scenes veered on ridiculous and felt very hokey. Emotionally, 'Maps to the Stars' should have been poignant but it felt too cold and clinical (Cronenberg's direction on the most part is the same). The pace can drag and with the trimming or excision of scenes that felt like padding that added nothing it would have felt much better. Cronenberg can do weird and disturbing very well, evident when he pioneered body horror, but very rarely to to such kitchen-sink or muddled effect.

Didn't feel for any of the characters apart from disgust, am aware they were not meant to be likeable and be unpleasant but the film failed too to make them properly fleshed out. The only character who came close to evoking any sympathy from me was Agatha, then her true colours were revealed and that was lost. Found that the film tried to do too many things and have too many strands and elements, and too many of them were given short shrift (the Cusack and Olivia Williams subplot was severely under-explored) or became convoluted, with too many things leaving the viewer perplexed due to being unexplained or poorly resolved. The script is not as rambling or bloated as that for 'Cosmopolis' but it is the most gratuitously crass script of any Cronenberg film and never sounds natural. The ending felt tacked on.

Altogether, not my cup of tea sadly but did find still a good number of great things about it. 5/10