Clumsy filmmaking causes ‘Lovelace’ to fall flat

Lovelace/2013/Millennium Films/93 min.

“Lovelace,” the story of the porn star’s rise and fall, presents a strange creative paradox: the film’s chief virtue is its strong acting, yet the characterizations are also uniformly one-note. In other words, the actors do their very best with what they have and deliver compelling work. But overall, “Lovelace” feels unsatisfying, superficial and obvious.

We first meet Linda Lovelace (Amanda Seyfried) as a jaded star, dragging on a cigarette as she lounges in a marble bathtub. She’s been used and abused. Via flashback, we see that before she became famous as the star of 1972’s “Deep Throat,” the first porn movie to play in mainstream theaters, Linda Boreman was a Bronx-born girl (relocated to Florida) who liked to lie out in the sun with her friend (Juno Temple) and dance at the local roller-skating rink.

When she meets sleazy Chuck Traynor (Peter Sarsgaard) at the rink, her life changes forever. They flirt, fall in love and marry, and through Chuck’s contacts she lands the lead role in the groundbreaking “Deep Throat.” Not only a schmoozer, Chuck appears to have a talent for controlling and abusing Linda as well as borrowing money on her behalf. (According to the filmmakers, “Deep Throat” grossed $600 million; Lovelace received $1,250.)

Meanwhile, Linda aspires to become a mainstream actress but these dreams are never fulfilled and she leaves Chuck. Her parents (Sharon Stone nearly unrecognizable as Linda’s frumpy cold-hearted mother and Robert Patrick as her disapproving Milquetoast dad) don’t offer much sympathy or support. Several years later, Linda remarries, has a kid and writes a book about her experiences called “Ordeal.”

While my gut feeling is that Chuck Traynor was more than likely a lowlife, he also likely possessed some kind of skulking magnetism or sly charm. By the same token, Linda Lovelace, portrayed here as a victim with a capital V, was probably not as pure as driven snow. I think she must have had a dash of femme fatale.

But Seyfried, while engaging, beams naïve girl-next-door cuteness throughout (wonder what Mila Kunis would have brought to the role?) just as Sarsgaard’s unmitigated dirtball oozes menace from start to finish. Even the scene where Chuck aims to charm Linda’s parents fails to convince. As mentioned, Stone and Patrick are excellent in supporting roles, as are Chris Noth, Bobby Cannavale, Hank Azaria and James Franco (as Hugh Hefner).

Still, Lovelace’s thorny story has been disputed and none of that complexity comes through in this film. The filmmakers Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman and writer Andy Bellin would have done well to take a page from Alfred Hitchcock’s book, remembering the disturbing truth that even full-on psychos often have a charismatic side and that most sane people mask a little darkness when you scratch under the surface.

“Lovelace” opened in limited release Aug. 9.

‘Killer Joe’ borders on bipolar, despite a riveting performance from Matthew McConaughey

Killer Joe/2011/LD Entertainment/103 min.

The words “TEXAS REDNECK” jump off the poster for “Killer Joe,” William Friedkin’s neo noir/Southern Gothic black comedy written by playwright Tracy Letts and starring Matthew McConaughey as a hitman who’s also a cop.

The rednecks are the Smiths, a Southern family for whom sleaze and greed have long replaced Sunday grace. In the opening scene, Sharla (Gina Gershon) gets out of bed and answers the door; her stepson Chris (Emile Hirsch) is outside, rain drenched, having been kicked out of his place by his girlfriend. Does Sharla bother to throw on clothes before opening the door? Hell, no. This ain’t no Ritz Hotel after all.

Turns out, Chris is a drug dealer with a debt and needs cash fast. His solution is to murder his mother (mostly unseen in the movie) and cash in on her insurance policy. No one’s really that fond of the mother so the rest of the family – stepmom Sharla, Chris’ remarried father Ansel (Thomas Haden Church) and his sister Dottie (Juno Temple) – are all on board with his plan. They’re not the sharpest tools in the shed, but they know a job like this has to be done right so they hire a pro named Killer Joe (McConaughey). Need I say, things don’t go to plan?

On the plus side, “Killer Joe” is well shot, well directed and well acted – McConaughey is especially magnetic, outlining the character’s chilling darkness and letting us fill in the blanks. On the minus side, though, “Killer Joe” never feels like much of a noir or much of a comedy. The mood shifts border on the bipolar, culminating in a resolution that may have worked on stage but seems laughable (in a bad way) on film, not to mention ridiculously violent. By that time, though, we are nothing if not primed for blood to be shed.

This marks the second collaboration for Friedkin and Letts – their first was 2006’s “Bug” based on Letts’ play. The Chicago-based playwright’s other work includes the Pulitzer-prize winning “August: Osage County” (the movie version is set to start filming in September) as well as “Superior Donuts” and “Three Sisters.”

Given the talent that came together for “Killer Joe,” was I wrong to hope for meatier fare? Though tempting on the outside, this ain’t the blood-red burger I wanted on my plate.

“Killer Joe” opens today in LA.