A rarity: a movie without a single genuine emotion throughout its full 90 minutes. The unspeakable ersatz world of celebrity slavishly but pathetically emulated by a bunch of young people descending like a plague of designer-brand locusts to strip celebrity homes of every famous named product they can find.

This bunch of faux-chic chums return again and again to the property occupied by Paris Hilton: who is too stupid not to leave a key under her doormat; too dumb not to know that she’s been serially burgled; and too wealthy to care. Hilton, who apparently co-operated with Copola on the movie is the paradigm exemplar of the famous-for-being-famous ‘celebrity’ with no discernible talent I guess Copola wants us to focus on. To wonder what Hilton thought the film was about is an oxymoron – with the emphasis on the last two syllables.

Bling is based on a true story of some half-assed Hollywood burglaries so casually and witlessly perpetrated that one wonders how the LAPD didn’t round the culprits up long before their 4th return to La Hilton Palace.

If this movie was worth making, and I rather think it wasn’t, it needs far more than Copola’s characteristic detached, cool, non-judgmental style. For once knowing irony just won’t do. There is something unworthy about being invited to be faintly amused at watching corrupted narcissistic young people throw away their youth and their futures out of boredom and a delusional vapid self-identity. Copola’s film is as weak and frustrating as the feckless, utterly ineffectual parents of her main protagonists. The film, like these hapless, useless adults, just looks on helplessly, secretly a little fascinated and in effect says “what can we do?”. Plenty babe. Plenty.

I get that Copola is inviting us to observe the implacable materialism of this otherwise totally unreal world but if these relatively trivial events in a dangerous world are worth examining then for God’s sake say something; have an artistic purpose. Not didactic or preachy but a point of view, an artistic perspective. Her film is like someone who sees a car crash with injured people who picks up a camera instead of a bandage and proceeds to film the pretty architectural shapes of crumpled metal carefully avoiding showing the reality of what that metal has done to the human beings within it.

As ever nowadays Bling is technically accomplished with some excellent performances: from the engaging Israel Broussard as Marc, the lone, loner male more at home with girls and handbags than the stereotypical sweaty jockstrap ambience of what passes for American college guy culture. Katie Chang’s Rebecca is the prime agent provocateur without a recognisable ethical thought or moral value to trouble her pretty head. When the police swoop Rebecca is happy to lie and deceive in any way she can to escape any responsibility. Even the concepts of friendship or loyalty are junked in favour of self-preservation.

Copola unworthily exploits very well the present slightly creepy girl/woman sexual ambiguity of Emma Watson as Nicki who sees burglary and theft as experiences that have happened to her not things she has done and which she ludicrously interprets as an opportunity for personal growth. Like a demented Beauty Queen, Nicki wants to be a leader who will change the world without any idea what being a leader means or requires, or how those qualities could be brought to affect the world. She is like a self-obsessed Apprentice high on weed: just a little more likeable.

Copola shows us a world where not only does no one know the value of anything; but worse, they don’t even know the price of anything either: the celebrities like Paris Hilton because they are so wealthy money has no meaning; and her aping young acolytes because stolen things are by definition free.

I can discern no worthwhile artistic purpose in this movie. The world and attitudes it objectively describes without mockery, anger, disapproval or satire is sadly only too obvious to us – The Pop Idol and Britain’s Got Talent franchises ‘entertain’ us with an endless sequence of wannabe celebrities most of whom can’t sing, can’t dance, in fact are bereft of any kind of talent at all. We laugh at their delusion, enjoy their unconscious humiliation. Big Brother set to off-key music.

Copola’s film it seems to me is as unworthy as the ‘reality’ TV show genre. It will be very interesting to see how the youthful movie audience responds to its adolescent, just pubescent, embryonic Sex In The City training bra emptiness. Many will probably miss the whole point and love it just as so many young people missed the chilling underlying message of Sorkin and Fincher's The Social Network.

Copola is an accomplished film-maker of genuine insight and sensitivity: what she is doing wasting her time on this waste of space topic is beyond me. It’s not as if we have the slightest doubt that such delusional, self-obsessed, narcissistic young people exist: so she inadvertently celebrates the very emptiness one assumes she is trying to attack. The idea that these profoundly immature twerps are in any way representative of today’s young people is a pretty shoddy, exploitative lie.

See this and other posts at:

http://zettelfilmreviews.co.uk
http://twitter.co./zettel23
http://pinterest.com/atthemovies

Z, I watched a Guardian podcast in which two of their reviewers were talking about this film. First was Peter Bradshaw, who, as if often the case with 'artsy' reviewers, did his best to see substance where there clearly is none. (I think he even resorted to the word 'frisson' somewhere, i.e. imaginary substitute for plot tension.) The other critic said something like, "Come on, it's a shallow film about shallow people."

Coppola has somehow (well, probably through association) managed to heft herself into being a critics' darling. However, I don't agree when you say:

Copola is an accomplished film-maker of genuine insight and sensitivity

'Lost in Translation' was everything I hate about artsy films: decorative and vacuous; actors' acting tics passing for 'depth'; casual racism excused as, well, art, and so on. As for 'Marie Antoinette' - I gave up after twenty mins because it was clear this had no more substance than a bad Adam Ant video (and much less entertaining). At which point it was very clear to me Coppola has no depth herself; no views worth listening to, and worst of all, absolutely no creative spark.

Terry

Agree with most of what you say except for Lost In Translation which is the basis of my suggestion that Coppola is capable of insight and sensitivity. However the casual use of Japanese stereotypes was a bad mistake.

Best

Z

I loved Lost in Translation. Adored it. It's a little masterpiece, in my opinion.

I agree Catkin which is why the stereotyped representation of the Japanese characters was so weird.

z

I agree Catkin which is why the stereotyped representation of the Japanese characters was so weird.

I don't think it's weird at all. Middle-class, liberal(ish), artsy types like Coppola like to believe they're open-minded and don't have racial/class prejudices. In fact, they're terrified that their position in the arts establishment hasn't really been earned (and often this is true) so subconsciously they convince themselves that other kinds of people are actually a bit stupid and thick. Occasionally, these prejudices slip out, through the external liberal shield. You see it with the BBC club too - made up of all those well-educated, middle-class comedian types, who get all the QI/News Quiz/Would I Lie to You/Have I Got News for You gigs because their face and tone fits. Whenever they're called on to play a working class character for a sketch or comment, notice how they always play them thick, stupid and mock 'street'?

Sorry, but Coppola is actually not very bright; has nothing to say. But her face fits. So she disguises her lack of content with artsy lighting, 'meaningful' pauses, etc, etc. Fortunately for her, most film critics are also part of the club, or would like to be, and therefore only too happy to give her the benefit of the doubt. Some of them are still giving her that benefit, even with this film.



Edited by Terry Edge at 09:56:00 on 15 July 2013