It's not that I dislike Ryan Gosling. I really don't. He gave an intelligent leading performance in The Ides of March, he had good emotional range in Blue Valentine, and he was perfect for the lead role in The Place Beyond the Pines.
And yet... I can't help but feel irritated after watching Only God Forgives, Nicolas Winding Refn's fourth English language film. It's second only to Valhalla Rising in terms of sheer unpredictability and experimentation from an already daring director, and I was interested how Refn and Gosling would work together following the monumental success of Drive. But after seeing this film, I'm not only disappointed by the flat script and characters, or the pretentiousness of the execution of Refn's interesting albeit underdeveloped ideas about masculinity and violence. I'm disappointed in Ryan Gosling, who is yet again playing the same character he's been playing for roughly six years.
You know the score. He's a young actor, famous for his smouldering good looks and puppy dog eyes, who seems intent on changing the image surrounding him as a suave lady killer by playing violent or damaged characters. Only problem is, he doesn't quite have the acting chops to pull it off. Sure, he can played the psychotic well enough. He has this curious ability to maintain an absolutely blank expression all the time, even when he's relentlessly stomping on a man's head in a lift. It worked in Drive because he was supposed to be this emotionally blank outcast, who only begins to develop feelings after meeting someone he truly cares for - all developed largely with longing looks, admittedly, but it was effective enough. However, in Only God Forgives, Gosling is given a much more demanding task - to condense his entire character into a single expression or look. And Ryan Gosling is not a man who can act with a single expression or look. As he stares intently at a prostitute he has taken for a lover, he could be thinking, 'I'm so alone', but he could equally be thinking 'I fancy some bread and cheese.' Or 'I hope she's not a ladyboy. What with this being Thailand and all.' Kristen Scott-Thomas at one point says 'I don't understand you.' Join the club, love. Only God can tell us what he's trying to say.
And then there's the violence. I understand the film was actually booed at the Cannes Film Festival for it's excessive screen violence. Admittedly, it can get a bit raucous in Cannes at times, but it's easy to understand why this film has garnered such controversy. A particularly rough scene climaxes on a close-up of a man having his eye removed with a knife. A supposed officer of the law splits a man open from neck to waist with a samurai sword, and the camera lingers on his bleeding carcass for what felt like ten minutes. Refn clearly has a fetish for violence - his previous films haven't exactly been family friendly - but he reaches new highs (or lows) with depraved, senseless acts shown in this film. Understand that I am not opposed to violence itself - a film's quality should also not be affected by the controversy it generates - but the director should have something to say with violence, even if it is only 'the audience wants to see this man punished' or 'this character needs to be shown to be strong and able to defend himself'. And the film does have some things to say with nastiness - a particularly brutal and well-choreographed fist fight is a high point - but more often than not it is a stylistic choice, the brutality a part of the environment itself. Atmospheric, yes, but art? No.
The film has two saving graces. One is the excellent soundtrack, with a strange yet effective infusion of oriental music and signature Refn electric synth vibes. The other is Kristen Scott-Thomas' terrifying portrayal of Gosling's evil mother, who thankfully saves the character from descending into a pantomime level Lady Macbeth, instead bringing an intimidating stage presence to the role. I would write wonders about the astonishing bright-neon look of the film, proving to be Refn's most visually resplendent picture yet, but he's been receiving similar praise for sixteen years, so I don't feel this nets him any additional favour.
I can't recommend this film. On the surface it appears to be a stylish, accomplished picture, filled with beautiful imagery yet with the atmosphere of a hallucinogenic nightmare, drawing the viewer in to the seedy criminal underworld of Bangkok. It's meditative, with pretentions to important, abstract ideas. Yet dig deeper, and you'll find almost nothing of substance.
★½
