Twihards insists that critics are unreasonably harsh on the virtues of Robert Pattinson, but notice that they don't rally enough enthusiasm to actually see any of his non-Twilight flicks such, I suspect this is because they realize that there youthful infatuation does not out way the fact that pictures such as Remember Me are not any good, and possibly they also understand that Pattinson himself is no better than the material. In Bel Ami, he is actually given very good material, based on Guy de Maupassant's 1895 novel, but he is merely only the weakest link in speciously poorly made movie.
Pattinson plays Georges Duroy, a literary rogue, a skillfully charming social climber, or as de Maupassant himself subtitled his book, "the history of a scoundrel." Here he is transformed by Pattinson into a thoroughly unlikable reprobate, who's unreasonably smug and arrogant, a womanizer and a manipulator, it would be a stretch to call this guy an anti-hero. Pattinson lacks the necessary charisma to pull off such a role, think of Johnny Depp in The Libertine a few years back, he seems ill-at ease here, as if he understands that the material is staggeringly out of his depth.
A capable supporting cast comes across mostly badly for one reason or another. Uma Thurman is primed and proper, but has to wobble her way through some horrendous dialogue. Kristen Scott Thomas plays frigid better than any other actress I know, oddly enough, a British actress, she has been a lot more warm and human in some recent French language films. Here she has little to do, but does successfully manage to exert great empathy for her repressive and shrewish character, but she also manages to remain unmoving and their for dull. Colm Meaney and Philip Glenister, two good actors, play the other men in Pattinson's vehicle, this may explain why they fail to get any dynamic scenes or many scenes for that matter away from the dull lead. Only Christina Ricci adds any spark in a spirited supporting turn, but her role is only one dimensional, she comes across more like someone's pet than as a fully developed human being.
The proceedings unfold so monotonously, that at one point Pattinson utters the line "this is so boring this endless to and fro." You don't get any more surreal than when movie characters start uttering your own inner thoughts. Everything fails to liven the surroundings, the sex is passionless, the character's motivations either unpleasantly despicable or maidenly vague. No wonder Pattinson is famous for playing a vampire, he is perhaps the most bloodless actor I have seen in ages, these days he's outclassed by Daniel Radcliffe.
Adapted by Rachel Bennette and directed by Declan Donnellan and Nick Ormerod, first time directors, who like most virgins know the basic moves, but lack the skills to be fully satisfying. Set in and around Paris at the end of the 19th century, the details look good, though pretentiously photographed by Stefano Falivene, it is filled with what one character calls "astonishing depths of emptiness." Pattinson has recently formed a partnership with legendary cult director David Cronenberg, they have a finished film title that I greatly anticipate titled Cosmopolis set for US release in August, after that they have another film in development. Maybe Cronenberg sees something in Pattinson that has been missing up until now on screen, but will fans ever warm to the actor outside of his popular franchise, I don't have the answer, but one thing that is for sure, it wont start with Bel Ami, a beggar's version of Dangerously Liaisons.
