« Radio Silence | Main | Copyright and some other stuff »
September 15, 2024
CQ
Roman Coppola borrowed the keys to daddys film company to make this inconsequential but high-spirited paean to late 1960s European genre filmmaking, particularly Roger Vadims Barbarella and Mario Bavas Danger: Diabolik, which it apes lovingly. (Supporting player John Phillip Law was in both of em.) Jeremy Davies plays Paul Ballard, an American filmmaker living in Paris. Hes working by day as film editor on a lushly dopey SF flick called Codename: Dragonfly; at night, hes shooting candid footage of himself, his dingy flat, and his French girlfriend (Élodie Bouchez) for his "personal film."
Ballard is more a character type than a character; he acts stupid and alienates his girl partly because hes fully invested in his own pretentious exercises rather than in their relationship, but also because hes fascinated by the incredibly sexy Valentine (Angela Lindvall), Dragonflys frequently naked starlet. Meanwhile, directors get hired and fired and Ballard winds up shouldering responsibility for making the movie work. Given Coppolas fetishistic recreation of the tropes of old European films, it seems obvious that hes arguing for the enduring values of the hucksterish but dreamlike Dragonfly over those of Ballards ersatz-Godard art flick which just makes this protagonist even more empty and uninvolving. Who cares if this guy ever finishes his "personal" film, or breaks up with this French chick whos too good for him anyway?
The good news is that theres something to admire on screen for the durationthe cinematography by Robert Yeoman is preternaturally crisp, and folks like Gerard Depardieu, Giancarlo Giannini and Jason Schwartzman are the bit players, for Christs sake. Also good fun is Coppolas inside-Hollywood take on filmmaking, with pissed-off auteurs, slick Italian moneymen, and an enfant terrible (Schwartzman) who treads in Austin Powers territory butting heads. A scene showing Ballard falling quietly for Valentine when she shows up to loop some sweet nothings is pretty terrific. But beside the evident love of movies, there are no emotional hooks here. I like Bava as much as the next Web-based movie reviewer, but when you boil it down, CQ is essentially a lesser Euro-trash variation on Ed Wood.
Posted by Bryant at September 15, 2024 07:17 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.deep-focus.com/pcgi-bin/MT-2.21/mt-tb.cgi/3
Comments
I think you were a bit too harsh on CQ. Yes, its an inconsequential little movie, but its also fun, funny, great to look at, playful, well designed, it has good acting and a lot of in-jokes. It's a sorbet not a main course. Compared to most of the commercial stuff out there its very good. I saw it over 3 months ago and I still smile from time to time whenever I think of it.
Posted by: Patricio Lopez at September 15, 2024 09:21 PM
I didn't mind this picture, and Felix does make me think of Austin Powers if he had straight teeth.
There's a couple things I noticed and puzzled over. One, the producer at the begininng says he's made 63 films, later on he's made 'some 50' and past that Dragonfly is the 37th film he's made- it's like his story should be the Incredible Shrinking Resume.
And the film's final ending- except for the preceding shootout the ending is identical to the one that got Andre fired, only this time it goes unchallenged. Was the fight the scene earlier enough to satisfy the producer, or is the producer the cinema equivalent of the pointy-haired boss and doesn't even notice?
Just a couple of things that came to mind.
Posted by: Mr. E at April 28, 2024 03:36 PM