A One Mann’s Movies review of “Amsterdam” (2022).
I was told off, a few weeks ago, by The Illustrious Mrs Movie Man about this film. Because the first time the trailer for “Amsterdam” was shown, I was involuntarily making little orgasmic noises as the cast of the film was progressively revealed. Astonishing! And directed by David O. Russell – the man behind “Joy“, “American Hustle” and “Silver Linings Playbook”. So I was SO looking forward to seeing this one.
But what a crushing disappointment! Big, big sigh.
Bob the Movie Man Rating(s):
Plot Summary:
Burt Berendsen (Christian Bale), a doctor, Harold Woodman (John David Washington), a black wannabe attorney battling against the racial prejudices of the time, and Valerie Voze (Margot Robbie), a bohemian artist with a mysterious background, are thrown together by the Great War. They find freedom and peace in Amsterdam for a few years, making a bond to always look after each other. When years later Burt and Harold get drawn into a murder-mystery, that bond gets tested.
Certification:
Talent:
Starring: Christian Bale, John David Washington, Margot Robbie, Anya Taylor-Joy, Rami Malek, Robert de Niro, Mike Myers, Chris Rock, Andrea Riseborough, Michael Shannon, Taylor Swift, Zoe Saldana.
Directed by: David O. Russell.
Written by: David O. Russell.
Twitter Handles: #AmsterdamMovie.
“Amsterdam” Review:
Positives:
- The film is a joy to look at, with 1930’s New York beautifully realised.
- The film has a few surprises, as you would expect from David O. Russell. There are some gags that made me laugh. And some twists, in the form of imagined fantasy elements, that suitably shock when they happen.
- Christian Bale, as always, is a really class act and his partnership with John David Washington works really well. The film hits its stride when the two of them are doing their schtick together, and Bale in particular is hilarious, always experimenting with different drug combinations and (consequentially) often scrabbling around on the ground for his glass eye! Robert de Niro delivers a solid and impressive performance. And it’s great to see Mike Myers back on the big screen again: his “sand dance” sequence is very Austin-esque!
Negatives
- If you’re a regular reader you’ll KNOW I hate voiceovers in movies. And you’ll KNOW that I like “show don’t tell” and abhor films that feel they need to ‘mansplain’ their plots. “Amsterdam” EXCELS in having mansplaining voiceovers all over the place! It’s appalling: Russell should be tied between two horses for it!
- Not only that, but some of the script feels like it was written on the fly, down the pub and never sense-checked by anyone. For example, in an early scene in a funeral director’s the cast keep repeating the same lines over and over again. I started to think “Is this a joke? Is there a punchline coming up?” But no… it just seems to be incompetence! Utterly bizarre. All in all, this script generated more eye-rolling moments for me that any other film I’ve seen this year.
- It felt to me like some of the cast weren’t very comfortable with their words (and rightly so). The normally excellent Anya Taylor-Joy and even Michael Shannon didn’t particularly impress this time. And Taylor Swift – fortunately only in the film for a short cameo – is a casting mistake.
- The film states that “Most of this is true”. And there’s a really interesting and horrific aspect of the plot that should have been the focus: namely the American Eugenics movement, set to sterilize ‘undesirable’ elements of the population to purify the gene pool. (I’m not making this up… see here). But this aspect of the film barely registers in the story: it really deserves an exposé movie all of its own.
Summary Thoughts on “Amsterdam”:
One of the year’s big let-downs. How such a wonderful cast can be wasted on such a mess of a movie is truly criminal.
This of course is just my perspective. Maybe you loved it! If so, please comment!
Trailer for “Amsterdam”:
The trailer is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLs2xxM0e78 .
The actor John David Washington IS Black. So to describe his character as Black is redundant and unnecessary especially since the races of Bale and Robbie are not stated.
Marie – that’s a fair cop as a general statement. But the comment was not about Washington per se but about the character of Harold Woodman, who is a struggling attorney in the 30’s principally due to his colour. So I’ve left the adjective in, but added the clarification of its relevance (which wouldn’t be obvious if you’d not seen the film). Thanks for pointing this out.