Megalopolis

When you have a director that's responsible for the likes of The Godfather trilogy and other films like Apocalypse Now, you always have to at least investigate what their most recent film is all about. Particularly with all the rumors of it being way over cost, over due, decades in the making, reshoots throughout, unconventional sets, etc. etc. There's an intrigue that begs, "Is Francis Ford Coppola putting together another masterpiece?"

I won't bury the lead. With Megalopolis, the answer is most certainly no, unfortunately. 

Instead, Megalopolis holds the distinction of being one of the most disappointing films of the year, though conversely, also one of the most unforgettable because of just how much...it is. Megalopolis is a lot. A lot of "what" varies, but one thing it wears proudly on its chest - and that I can't fault it for - is the level of ambition it wants to pack into its existence. 

The film is touted a "fable", as it explains that New Rome - basically New York City - is on the verge of change. On one side of that coin is the architect/thinker/creator Cesar Catilina who looks to the future, while on the other side there's Mayor Cicero who is stuck in the past. Their conflict unfolds as a "warning" to the fall of an empire, Coppola shouting loudly that America is not invincible to the same type of downfall that Rome experienced. 

As can be seen by the wildly varying reviews for Megalopolis (there are multiple 100 scores and 0 scores on Metacritic), this film is going to largely be in the eye of the beholder...and potentially those claiming they understand all of it (don't trust these people). This comes from a talented director, so there's a level of quality already assumed in things like editing, cinematography, and more. Similarly, the cast is impressive, though the acting can be as crazy as the movie at times. Adam Driver and Shia LaBeouf are the MVPs, doing various amounts of heavy lifting. LaBeouf in particular seems to be drinking up the chaos and embracing it naturally. 

There's an undercurrent of ambition underneath the whole thing that consistently feels just out of grasp. You can tell Coppola has a lot to say and a lot of ideas he wants to get across here, many of which are grand. Things like legacy, building for future generations, modern day politics, utopias and what creates them, etc. There's so much being thrown out, with none of it coming across all that clearly, that all you can really do is admire the attempt while being sad it didn't work out better. Personally, I was surprised the film was under 2.5 hours and one can't help but wonder if this could have been more successful as 2 separate films, or something 3+ hours long. 

The story is easy to follow in broad strokes, but almost impossible to specifically know what's going on from moment to moment. While the aforementioned editing is strong, the pacing is horrendous, resulting in a bunch of scenes that are smashed together with little-to-no transition between them. The messiness of the screenplay became my biggest issue with Megalopolis, and it got to the point where more often than not I simply had no idea how we got from one scene to the next. I asked myself, "What the f**k am I watching?" on more than one occasion. 

Megalopolis deserves attention simply because of who's involved. Cinephiles can't help but be intrigued with its scope and potential. But it's a decades-in-the-making trainwreck of sorts, that general audiences will absolutely refuse and even avid movie-goers like myself are going to have the stark realization that this is not another masterpiece, but rather a messy attempt at one. I give it considerable marks for swinging for the fences though, as you can feel the ambition of a talented filmmaker bursting through the seams. It's unfortunate they didn't come together in a more cohesive way. 

Rapid Rath's Review Score | 5.5/10