2012 Cannes Film Festival

'The Paperboy' Movie Review - 2012 Cannes Film Festival

Narrative flaws hold this exploitative film back

The Paperboy movie review
Matthew McConaughey and Zac Efron in The Paperboy
Photo: Millennium Films

Lee Daniels has made something far afield from his 2009 sophomore effort, Precious, with The Paperboy, a somewhat campy, exploitative, '70s style feature with thematic hints of A Time to Kill and To Kill a Mockingbird and a second half vibe that reminded me of Cape Fear. That narrative, however, can't support the weird mix of serious drama and over the top craziness that come together to create a story that never finds its footing.

Daniels' script, which he co-wrote with Peter Dexter based on Dexter's novel, tends to be throwing scenes at the wall just to see what will stick and while it's largely a messy production, the totally unexpected final act shows promise for how great this might have been with a little more focus.

'The Paperboy'
Review
Grade: C+

The Paperboy"The Paperboy" is a Millennium Films release, directed by and is rated R for strong sexual content, violence and language.

The cast includes , , , , , and .

For more information on this film including pictures, trailers and a detailed synopsis .

Set in 1969, The Paperboy takes place in the small town of Lately, Florida where Ward James (Matthew McConaughey), a reporter for the "Miami Times", has come home to write a story on Hillary Van Wetter (John Cusack), a man convicted of killing a crooked town sheriff. Knowing the town the way he does, Ward believes Hillary was wrongly convicted of the crime based on insubstantial evidence and a judge just looking for someone to blame.

Ward's father (Scott Glenn) runs the local newspaper and his baby brother Jack (Zac Efron) has found himself going nowhere fast, losing his swimming scholarship at the University of Florida after draining the school's pool and is now sitting home. With nothing else to do, Jack plays chauffeur for his brother while he's in town with his colleague Yardley (David Oyelowo), a man whose skin color adds to the on-and-off racial vibe the film is carrying.

Initially just excited to be around his brother, Jack's interest in Hillary's case takes a turn once he meets Charlotte Bless (Nicole Kidman), a white trash woman who finds a particular interest in writing inmates and falling in love with them. Hillary is her current obsession, so much so she has already determined she's going to marry him. Jack, being a lovestruck young man without much world experience, falls at her feet as the film establishes its myriad of themes from Jack's odd sexual attraction to Charlotte, the race relations in Lately, why exactly Ward is working so closely with Yardley and a variety of other bits and bobs that surface throughout. Thing is, none of them really fit together into a cohesive narrative as much as they play like a collection of ideas.

Daniels, cinematographer Roberto Schaefer (Quantum of Solace) and editor Joe Klotz (Precious) take the '70s vibe and run with it, though that's all they seem to be doing, attempting to create a vibe. It's almost like you can see them trying too hard as one scene dissolves into the other and plays over another in a delirious cacophony of multiple exposure that ends up saying very little.

For the most part the film is shown from Jack's perspective, him being the titular and metaphorical "paperboy", and the presentation I'm describing here is largely used while he longingly stares at Charlotte, her words and face creating a blurred vision of his object of desire as she tramps around in her short skirt, bountiful eyeliner and bleach blonde wig. Kidman is certainly a sight, but not one to fawn over, and if her character's stupidity doesn't cause for disgust, the moment we watch her pee on Jack's face after he's stung by a jellyfish most likely will, though Kidman's line delivery is quite funny.

The problem here isn't the fact it's gross to watch a stream of urine land on Efron's face, but the fact we don't care about him, her, Ward or anyone in the film. Strangely, the closest we get to any character is the James family maid Anita (Macy Gray) who also, for whatever reason, narrates the film. The film isn't enough of a comment on anything to give Anita the narrative reigns as much as it feels like a crutch. Often enough she's just describing what's on the screen or giving information that could be taken care of in a brief expository shot. The characters are all kept at arm's length so when something good or bad happens we don't have much reason to care and it takes away a lot from the film, a film that grows increasingly exploitative and is always better when the story is seen rather than told.

Unfortunately, a lot is wasted as a result of the film's problems. The performances are actually quite good, some cringe-worthy such as Cusack as the jailed Van Wetter, a man I wouldn't want to have anything to do with. Kidman is highly entertaining as the inmate-loving, white trash sex kitten, willing to rip the crotch out of her stockings and simulate sex from a distance upon first meeting Van Wetter. Ugh, just the name Van Wetter gives me the willies and he never lets up.

Efron is solid, though nothing to write home about -- no harm, no foul -- and McConaughey is pretty much kept on a tight leash, not able to go explore his frequently charismatic self even though you can see him trying, which does hurt the performance a bit.

One character that is interesting and may have been a better focus of attention is David Oyelowo's Yardley. Considering the racial tension throughout much of the film, the curious relationship between Yardley and Ward and the circumstances that follow could have been something here. With where Yardley ends up and the story concludes, you could have had a down dirty in the swamp variation of The Godfather final montage that would have been one hell of a sight.

Overall it seems like a missed opportunity. Though I've never read the book, it almost seems as if they took too literal an approach to the material instead of getting creative in adapting it for the screen. Attempts at creativity seemed to largely focus on messing with the visual presentation where the gritty, old school photography was more than enough. While I did enjoy the film's ending, the journey there was a miss, but not one I'm entirely sorry I got to see.

GRADE: C+
Thanks for Reading! Join the Community!
Support the Site! Make it Faster! No Ads!

Your support goes a long way in ensuring RopeofSilicon.com stays stable. For less than the price of one small popcorn, you can can help support RopeofSilicon and, in turn, visit the site every day without ads! Including this one!

Subscribe Now!

More Movie Reviews

'Frank' (2014) Movie ReviewC

Frank (2014)

'Sin City: A Dame to Kill For' (2014) Movie ReviewD+

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For (2014)

'The Trip to Italy' (2014) Movie ReviewB

The Trip to Italy (2014)

'The Expendables 3' (2014) Movie ReviewC+

The Expendables 3 (2014)

Click to Browse Even More Reviews
  • Kate

    It's a pitty. The book and even the April version of the script had a perfectly fine narrative but I can tell from reading several reviews that a LOT has changed during pre-production. The added elements (like making Yardley black) should have been interesting subtexts but by all means it sounds like they overshadowed the main plot. Eg in the script, a narrator (Jack since the entire story is told form his perspective) appears only in the opening scenes to explain and introduce a few things and then in the last scene - which makes way more sense.

    Oh well, I'm still looking forward to see it.

    • carly

      You read the script?? JEALOUS! Where did you find it?

  • Kyle Coley

    awww man :/

  • Matthew

    Is that Nicole Kidman a contender for oscar 2013 ?

  • Dex Weatherfield

    If Ms. Kidman's whoohah is actually shown while urinating (i.e. an 'in your face' shot and not a sideshot or over the shoulder shot) I'll buy a ticket. Otherwise, it's just a lot of PR crap to pick our pockets and waste our time.

    • sTEVE

      Really? That's the only thing that would convince you to see this movie? A graphic depiction of Nicole Kidman urinating? On Zac Efron no less?

      Really?

      • Dex Weatherfield

        Really!!

  • yos

    why nicole! i hate her, zac need someone younger. it's disgusting

  • Somebody

    Matthew, since you refuse to wear deodorant, at least keep your arms down please. Like "p.u."!!!!