| SIMONE Rating:   Director: Andrew Niccol Producer: Andrew Niccol Writer: Andrew Niccol Directors of Photography: Derek Grover, Edward Lachman Cast: Al Pacino, Catherine Keener, Rachel Roberts, Jay Mohr Visit the IMDB page for full cast and crew |
 Click the photo to buy merchandise from Simone |
Review by: Dan
Tester
8/25/02
Simone, the new film from the creator of The Truman Show, poses an interesting question: Is it possible to digitally create Hollywood actors and actresses and effectively cast them in feature films, thus disposing of flesh and blood performers and their attitudes altogether? This is an idea I have actually pondered from time to time in the past, although the current reality of the situation (Jar Jar Binks for example) appears to leave this concept light years away. However, Simone suggests it is possible, and spends two hours rather haphazardly trying to show how it could work.
Al Pacino plays Viktor Taranksy, a struggling former A-list director whose latest film has been unexpectedly shut down mid-shoot by the studio due to the sudden departure of the film's temperamental star (Winona Ryder) due to "creative differences." Taransky is outraged and complains to the studio head Elaine Christian (Catherine Keener) about how hideously Hollywood has sold out to the whims of the "flavor of the month" movie stars and forgotten about art. Elaine seems to have an uncharacteristic sympathy for the failed director, but that is soon explained. You see, Elaine is Viktor's ex-wife. Of course she is! In Hollywood movies about Hollywood, the struggling male protagonist always has a more powerful antagonist that is his ex-wife, and she is usually the head of a movie studio. And she always retains a soft spot for her ex, although she has always moved on to some good looking airhead in a relationship that just can't really last, can it? Hooray for consistency!
Anyway, Taransky needs his film to be finished to salvage his career and is luckily approached out of the blue by a madman with a solution. The madman (a too brief Elias Koteas) has perfected a computer program that creates a realistic enough looking digitally animated "actress" that could be inserted into his film, in place of his absent star. Pacino is not impressed and turns him down, but upon the madman's death (no less than a week later) he receives the materials in the mail and takes a look. He fiddles with it a bit, and suddenly a gorgeous vision named Simone appears on his computer screen. Maybe it would be possible, Taransky thinks, and as I sat back, curious to see exactly how he could pull this off all by himself, I was shocked to see the screen fade to black, and the words "Nine Months Later" appear. The picture fades up, and we see Taransky reveling in the great success of his film, and his newfound international sensation, Simone (a digitally manipulated Rachel Roberts). We, the audience, are denied any knowledge of how Taransky could possibly have pulled this off. This is very lazy filmmaking in my opinion. This is the most important part of the story. So we are just expected to ignorantly accept that Taransky was able to pull off the greatest fraud in cinema history all by himself, and without fail.
The rest of the film is both a farce and a satire, as Taransky must keep the truth secret from the studio, the eager press, and the world in general, all of whom passionately demand Simone! Of course, Simone does not exist, and Taransky must think of every excuse in the book as to why the star will not appear in public. It starts out funny enough, but at some point, it just gets ridiculous. Late in the film, Taransky actually places a mannequin in the driver's seat of his car and manipulates the steering wheel squatting next to her to create the illusion of Simone driving. My question is: Where did he get that mannequin that looked so much like Simone? This guy certainly has a lot of interesting stuff going on off-camera.
Simone is really an attack on the American public's gullibility, and it's silly reverence of movie stars. But the digital look of Simone's character looked so unreal to me that it was distracting as to how the world would fall for it. She looks better than Jar Jar to be sure, but is only as "real" looking as Lara Croft in the video games. Maybe that was part of Niccol's point; that we will truly fall for anything. But this angle is never explored, so I am left at a loss. And the film really veers horribly off track in its final half hour, wasting time when it could have been devoted to the more important earlier expository scenes.
Pacino is good in an uncharacteristic comedic role, but his somewhat lackluster performance left me emotionally detached from his character. Catherine Keener is very good as Pacino's ex-wife studio head; her presence is officially welcomed into any film from this point out. She is my favorite character actress working today (I view her as much more than just a character actress -- Warren). And Rachel Roberts is stunningly beautiful as the computer animated Simone; I never doubted for a second that the world would be so caught up in this particular celebrity. Roberts may never act again, but I will be first in line to buy the next Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition for sure. I am smitten. The rest of the cast performs well enough I suppose, but no one is really given much to do except be stupid, an important element for Simone to play out.
Maybe there will be a time in the not-so-distant future in which computer technology will advance to a point to allow for complete feature films starring an entire cast of virtual actors. Actually, after contemplating the already current overabundance of one-dimensional box office stars, like Ben Affleck, Vin Diesel, and Adam Sandler, it seems that maybe we are virtually there already.
But as always, it is only one man's opinion.
Agree? Disagree? Talk about it in our message boards.
|
|
|
|
|