Olivier Assayas is a director who has done many different sorts of films, but ultimately they are always centered on intense characters caught in remarkable situations. Sometimes, the works are so subtle that the intensity and immediacy of those situations might escape the viewer, and other times, Assayas’s patented slow burn, near elegiac approach creates a disconnect between moment and meaning. When it works, it really works, and when it does not, it often leads to interesting if not quite high flying works. Such is the case with his latest film, The Wizard of the Kremlin, based on the book by Gullliano da Empoli, the film is less biography or deconstruction than it is a broad view of terrible people doing terrible things. It does, perhaps, miss a beat in not asking as clearly as it might “are the handlers not just as awful as the handled” but one cannot hope for everything, even from a film maker of this caliber.
Courtesy Vertical Entertainment
What we have, though, is a film that beyond being well directed, if at times, maybe, over designed, is technically sound, with excellent sense of space, place and time, but, moreover, an extraordinary cast. None are better, here, than Jude Law, who despite the billing, gets a relatively small if unforgettable role as the intelligent, menacing, ruthless and paranoid leader of Russia. He does much with how he carries himself, and it is a becoming as much as anything else, rather than mimicry. It is a full and true performance, and a highlight of the first half of this cinematic year. Paul Dano, as “The Wizard” of the title, gets a much less intriguing part, at least onscreen.
Courtesy Vertical Entertainment
Too often, to the film’s detriment, Dano describes what we see, as narrator, as we are seeing it, and spoils what is about to occur. The film would have worked far better if the narration had set the stage, or given less bland emotional and more telling intellectual, insights into his character, but that is not the film we are left with. We also have Jeffrey Wright and Alicia Vikander in supporting parts, with Vikander almost channeling aspects of Sharon Stone from Casino, but Assayas is no Scorsese and her character not nearly as interesting. Wright, of course, carries every scene he is in, even if all it calls for is a nod and a murmur of “hmph”
This could have been a marvelous actors showcase, with a script that was less obvious, less clumsy and more imbued with its director’s typical insightful and exciting touch. Instead, scenes veer from energetic-and far too few of those-to almost glacially slow, undermined by plot, story and character beats that we see coming and not just because the narrator has already told us about them. Despite these flaws, the film is not unworthy of being seen. Any Assayas work is worth seeing, and this film is no exception. It may not have the vim and vigor of an Irma Vep or Carlos, but it does not try. This is slow Assayas, more in tune, aesthetically, with something like Clouds of Sils Maria, except the monster here is real.
Courtesy Vertical Entertainment
If you have patience and do not mind being told rather than shown, and if you love the cast, you will find rewards in this film. Even a flawed work from a great artist is worth seeing, and this film is no exception. This reviewer does not usually like to mention awards in reviews but will do so here, and that is that Jude Law is very likely to get a lot of attention for this film, and once you see it, he may be the only thing you clearly recall from the viewing
The Wizard of the Kremlin is now playing in theaters.
Leave A Comment