Hail, Caesar!

With an all-star Hollywood cast including Josh Brolin, George Clooney, Scarlett Johansson and Channing Tatum, and direction by the Coen brothers, who have created such praised artistic works as The Big Lebowski (1998), No Country For Old Men (2007) and True Grit (2010), one goes to see Hail, Caesar! with high expectations.

The first problem is noticeable right from the get-go. Most of the stars that have been advertised as being in major roles hardly appear at all. Looking at the poster and the trailer, for example, one sees Scarlett Johansson, Channing Tatum, Ralph Fiennes and Jonah Hill. Their screen time consists of the scenes represented by the trailer. They appear in two scenes each, at the most. Jonah Hill appears in all of one scene, his character having no influence on the story at large, but rather on particular subplot. The dramatic performances, talents and voices of the film’s actors are quite good. They convey their characters’ emotions and attitudes quite nicely. It’s just a shame that the actors hardly get any screen time or that the characters contribute so little as a result.

The main roles really belong (almost only) to Josh Brolin as studio producer Eddie Mannix, a historical Hollywood figure, with George Clooney as Hollywood actor Baird Whitlock and Alden Ehrenreich as young Western actor Hobie Doyle, parodies of Kirk Douglas and Kirby Grant respectively. Whitlock is somewhat of a comic relief, mostly owing to his naïveté in a hostage situation where he himself is the hostage. While Mannix is challenged with business, the studio world, the factors leading to the fall of Hollywood film popularity and Whitlock’s kidnapping, Hobie is challenged with adapting to a different film genre and meeting the expectations to keep up appearances in the public eye. While this means that Mannix has to deal with technically greater challenges than Hobie, it could be said, at least by the end, that Hobie proves to be an arguably, if slightly or even accidentally, more proactive character – the key word being arguably. As Mannix plans to resolve Whitlock’s kidnapping by paying the ransom, Hobie leans more towards rescuing him, though admittedly by chance.

The comedy isn’t great, generally earning a short laugh here or there. Some parts are funnier than others, but for a comedy film it is a little disappointing. The most entertaining portions of the film are those where the actors’ characters perform in early-to-mid 20^th Century-style film segments, such as Scarlett Johansson as a mermaid in an aquatic spectacle or Channing Tatum as a tap-dancing sailor in an energetically choreographed bar setting. The costumes are glamorous, classic and bold. The cinematography too is at its best when it mimics the style of the past. One could even visualise these parts as black and white even if the images are brightly coloured. Perhaps, from an entertainment angle, the film should have had more focus on these kinds of segments and the drama of the characters participating in them.

Since the kidnapping plot amounts to basically nothing, it might have been better to simplify the plot to these scenes imitating classic Hollywood filmmaking, interconnect the multi-strand narrative in some way, and create a story that, while perhaps a little abstract in its progression, shows clear goals, important involvement from its characters towards this end and a risk that challenges them from reaching it. The idea of the studio facing difficulty alone feels like it could create more drama without the focus being drawn on this kidnapping plot. But if the filmmakers’ hearts are set on a kidnapping story, at least have the cast of characters contribute to the narrative and include some sense of difficulty to its climax. But one can speculate.

Hail, Caesar! is sadly disappointing for those interested in being entertained. Based on the deconstructable qualities of past Coen brothers’ films such as The Big Lebowski, one wonders if there was an intentional purpose behind filming an all-star Hollywood cast in a film about Hollywood and neglecting their screen time or character involvement. Is the film experimentation with plot or narrative that deviates from basic storytelling? Was there an issue of time during production? Is the film a middle finger towards Hollywood writers, whom the film portrays as the antagonists? Instinct tells one there is something to deconstruct in the way this film was told. However, though it has admirable visual design, in terms of an audience’s response, Hail, Caesar! wastes a fitting all-star Hollywood cast, the characters’ subplots don’t contribute to the main story, and the film is resolved far too easily; there is no threat or risk, no chance that the main characters won’t succeed, and the twist of who is the real antagonist has no discernable reason or consequence. Is it a bad film, or is it secretly good? As a spectacle it entertains and has the potential to do more, but in terms of basic storytelling or as a comedy in some cases, its audience reception is likely to be that of general dislike.