Release Date: August 2, 2013 (Limited and VOD)
Director: Paul Schrader
MPAA Rating: NR
The Canyons seemed like something of an oddity from the moment it was announced to the world. It’s directed by Paul Schrader, who wrote Raging Bull and Taxi Driver, written by Bret Easton Ellis, author of American Psycho and Less Than Zero, and stars Lindsay Lohan and porn star James Deen. Although that sounds like a recipe for disaster, there was this sort of wonder about how a collaboration between Schrader and Ellis would turn out. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a horrible mess that would be more suited as a 90s Cinemax flick than a real movie.
The film attempts to draw parallels between the decline in cinema and the lives of young Hollywood by heavy handedly juxtaposing images of dilapidated and abandoned theaters with the drama transpiring between a rich Hollywood couple. One can also look at the film itself as a statement that we’re now living in a post-theatrical age and this is the kind of shit we’re going to have to deal with. If Schrader was attempting the latter by creating a lifeless bore of a movie, then his message has been received and I thank him for contributing to the problem.
Visually, The Canyons looks like a slightly better shot episode of Days of Our Lives. Just because a film runs on a low budget doesn’t mean it has to look the part. Digital camera technology has advanced to the point where even the smallest budgets can produce something that at least has the guise of being professional. Again, one could argue that the visuals represented the shallow emptiness of the characters’ lives, but if it looked great, would people be complaining that it didn’t accurately portray the meaningless existence these people have? I doubt it. There were a few moments of stylistic flair, including some interesting framing choices and at least one notable tracking shot. It’s a shame that the filmmakers weren’t just a bit more adventurous when it came to the camera work, because that seemed like the most promising thing about the movie.
The least promising aspect, however, were the performances from the actors. Granted, one can’t expect much from James Deen, and Lindsay Lohan is a lost cause, but everyone in this was painfully bad. The only exception was Gus Van Sant, who played Deen’s psychiatrist, which makes the film look worse that the best actor in the film is a director.
Out of everyone involved, James Deen showed the most potential, which isn’t saying much, but one day I could see him acting with his mouth rather than his penis. Miss Lohan on the other hand, is headed in the opposite direction.
I like films about the emptiness of Hollywood socialites, but not when the film itself is as hollow as the characters. I’m going to do my best in chalking this one up as a failed experiment and retain my respect for Schrader and Ellis, though it won’t be easy. On a normal viewing, I would say avoid this one completely, however if you have some people over for drinks, it might be worth some laughs.
