Vice

Over the last 10 years 7 of the 10 male winners for Best Actor were playing real people (only two for women). It’s clear that the Academy love a big performance of a big character, however this begs the question whether this type of performance is acting or is it merely an impersonation? The answer is acting, but there’s just different levels. At one end of the scale we have Gary Oldman playing Churchill whose just Gary Oldman playing Churchill and at the other end of the scale we have Natalie Portman who plays Jackie Kennedy but gives a performance of such depth and skill she is able to making us believe we are watching Jackie Kennedy.

With the likes of Gary Oldman, Eddie Redmayne and Daniel Day Lewis winning its quite easy to see why Christian Bale is a favourite. Whilst Bale’s performance isn’t quite as engrossing as Portman’s performance it’s still a role Bale dives into, fully making the real-life character his own. It’s mostly because Bale invests so much into any role that he’s almost unrecognisable and once again, to convincingly portray Dick Chaney, Bale went full out and put on a ton of weight to appear more convincing than he would have been by simply donning a fat suit.

It is the sort of thing that wins you Oscars and I won’t begrudge him if he does, it’s a fun performance yet it captures a quiet, complaintive menace to a very uncharismatic but highly persuasive character. It is, undoubtedly, Bale’s show because the supporting performances don’t even and close to matching Bale’s quality performance. Amy Adams is given an increasingly thankless role (but at least it’s a little more fleshed out than the standard ‘supportive wife role’) and Sam Rockwell can’t escape the ‘famous actor playing famous person drawback’ in his performance as George W. Bush.

The man who Bale overshadows the most is director Adam Mckay who makes his messiest work yet. It’s not his worst film (that dishonour goes to the Anchorman sequel) but with the pace off-kilter and editing choppy most of what’s good about Vice isn’t down to him. The film has been accused for being condescending by explaining relatively simple political terms to the audience. Whilst many people accusing the film of this tend to forget not everyone is American, and therefore not closely in tuned with American politics, it’s voiceover narration and cheeky nods to the camera completely go against the show don’t tell rhetoric. It is something that worked well in The Big Short because the financial market is slightly more niche than politics, but here it feels as though the film is underestimating its audience (which some have claimed the mid credits scene also does).

Trying to cram forty years of American politics within 130 minutes is difficult to do without a bit of narration or summarisation, but it’s an indicator that the film is too board in the canvas it is trying to paint, especially when the crux of why Chaney is so vilified occurred during his years as VP. By covering so much ground it feels as too unrevealing to be politically acute. However, it’s fun to watch for Bale’s performance, and if you predicted 10 years ago (when McKay was making average to good comedies) McKay would be making an Oscar nominated film, and one of most anticipated political dramas of the year, people would have thought you were taking the piss. But, here we are in 2019 and Adam McKay has been nominated, whether it was deserved or not (not) is hotly contested.

3/5