Adam Driver, left, and Nathalie Emmanuel in director Francis Ford Coppola’s “Megalopolis.” Credit: Lionsgate via TNS
Lionsgate — the entertainment company responsible for distributing director Francis Ford Coppola’s self-funded, $120 million passion project “Megalopolis” — faced intense online scrutiny when a trailer for the film was released in August.
According to an Aug. 22 article from Variety, the controversial trailer was swiftly taken down after viewers noticed it featured AI-generated, negative reviews of Coppola’s previous movies.
Lionsgate’s goal in doing this was to convince people to give the eccentric film a shot, pointing out — albeit dishonestly — that Coppola’s legendary hits like “The Godfather” or “Apocalypse Now” were also criticized at the time of their respective releases.
Fortunately for Lionsgate and Coppola, they won’t have to resort to ChatGPT to find negative reviews for “Megalopolis,” a midlife crisis of a film that feels like it was written while inebriated on an Ayahuasca darkness retreat.
There isn’t much plot to be found in “Megalopolis.” Loosely, it centers around a modern-day retelling of Rome, set in a Greco-Roman futuristic New York City.
Adam Driver (“Marriage Story”) plays Cesar Catilina, a pariah architect who wants to rebuild Rome in his image using a foreign material with mystical powers he engineered himself. Perhaps some of the lead used to sweeten wine in ancient Rome was also used in beverages on the set of “Megalopolis ” — it’d certainly explain a lot.
The most tragic aspect of “Megalopolis” is not its vapid commentary on the degradation of American values or the fading glory days of cinema, but rather how such a talented cast and crew was laid to waste.
It’s hard not to feel sympathy for the film’s actresses, most prominently Aubrey Plaza (“Parks and Rec”) and Nathalie Emmanuel (“Game of Thrones”). If audiences’ first exposure to these remarkably talented performers was “Megalopolis,” they’d think they were picked at random out of a queue of student actresses at a blind audition.
Like the rest of the film’s poor performances, it’s definitely not the fault of the actresses, but rather the script.
For starters, there’s absolutely no subtext in the dialogue. Characters essentially blurt out descriptions of whatever Coppola wants watchers to feel, or quote philosophers much smarter than the film’s writers in a desperate attempt to add a false sense of sophistication to the drivel unfolding on screen.
These technical issues pale in comparison to the deeply misogynistic undertones of the story, which objectify and villainize its female leads, an issue that would take an entirely separate review to discuss in its entirety.
The other disastrous component of “Megalopolis” lies in the persistent haughtiness that permeates its bloated, 138-minute runtime.
In addition to self-funding the film — likely due to the fact that no sane studio executive would hear the pitch for “Megalopolis” and agree to throw $120 million at it — Coppola also gave the film a five-star rating on Letterboxd.
The few people sharing Coppola’s idiosyncratic rating praise the story as brave and unique, when in reality plenty of films before “Megalopolis” — such as Richard Kelly’s 2006 film “Southland Tales” — lay out similar themes in much more fresh and daring ways, particularly because they don’t have their own pockets and the pedigree of a distinguished career to fall back on.
Of course, Coppola is a legendary director who deserves respect for being a pioneer of the modern film industry. His individuality is evidently a trait he takes great pride in, something displayed throughout “Megalopolis” in the form of Cesar, who seems to act as a Coppola stand-in at times.
At one point in the film, Cesar proclaims that “if you pretend to be good, the world wouldn’t take you seriously.” Perhaps “Megalopolis” should’ve pretended to be good a little harder, or at least tried to justify the millions of dollars wasted on a visually pleasing but thoughtless piece of art.
Ironically, the money used to create “Megalopolis” could have been put toward fixing the real-word problems it endeavors to portray, particularly poverty. Instead, the film comes across as out of touch with working class struggles, trying and failing to find common ground with audiences.
“Megalopolis” is not a misunderstood, philosophical art piece, no matter how hard someone who is trying to convince themselves of this lie tries to convince other moviegoers. It’s a stain on the legacy of a film industry icon, irrefutably proving, in its own twisted way, that dynasties do eventually crumble with time.
Rating: 1/5
