Martin Bradley
The credits show a series of derelict cinemas, now just ruins, before cutting to a kind of business lunch in which beautiful, vacuous movie people talk about movies and sex. The scene would appear to be 'badly' written and acted but brilliantly directed; if this is what constitutes the movies today it's little wonder so many theatres have closed down. You might call Paul Schrader's "The Canyons" a satire on the movie business but it's much too sour to be truly satirical. For decades Schrader has always been Hollywood's Number One Avenging Angel, condemning sex and violence in his puritanical fashion while showing it in extremis.Now he has turned his jaundiced eye on the business that has been providing him with a livliehood from the seventies onwards. It takes time to get your head around the inane dialogue and the stilted acting that in lesser hands might have condemned this to a straight-to-video release but this is an expensive production, brilliantly photographed in widescreen by John DiFazio, its money shots coming, not from below the belt, but from inside Schrader's head, or should we say from inside Schrader's head and that of writer Bret Easton Ellis who has also been biting the hand that feeds him for quite awhile now.The problem lies in the casting. It's one thing having good actors play 'badly' but it doesn't really work in reverse. The lead here is played by porn star James Deen who is supposed to be someone who, if not exactly intelligent, is at least successful and in this role Deen never convinces for a second. Lindsay Lohan, on the other hand, is somewhat better. Lohan is someone who might have had something of a career had her personal life not got in the way. Everyone else is cast for their bodies and not for their brains which, I suppose, is just as it should be in a film about an industry that seems to have been founded on sex. No doubt the 'Me2' movement will find much here to back up their argument that Hollywood has long been operating on exploitaiton. At least Schrader has fun telling us that all this is bad while wallowing in it. Of course, most people haven't caught Schrader's little jest as intended and the film flopped. It may be far from his best work but I think it fits perfectly into his canon.
michaeltrivedi
This is a very interesting watch. The combination of Ellis and Schrader is a genuine treat. Lohan does a great job of doing what she does. And the other actors brilliantly keep the movie rolling.It is an intriguing story of actors and wealth in Los Angeles, particularly the Canyons. The film delves into pornography and murder, which at times can get rather boring. But it definitely held my attention, and is my favorite type of movie.7 Stars
ccmiller1492
The negative reviews of this film are incredible. Watching it without preconceptions, however, is probably essential. Both Lohan and Deen give stellar performances, the latter practically steals the film as the sadistic wealthy manipulator with long-standing mental issues who begins to seriously unravel when his sense of power over others is disrupted by his seemingly weak paramour. Deen wisely underplays it, with considerable subtlety, avoiding any suggestion of camp and thereby becomes quite realistically and quietly menacing. These two actors carry the film with enough skill to make it believable. In some ways reminiscent of "Gone Girl", but far more effective and meaningful than that over-rated, far more popular film. This work will eventually come into recognition for its merits. In the meantime, hopefully we will see more great work from both talented Lindsay Lohan and the new leading man with photogenic charisma, James Deen.
Rodrigo Amaro
I know I shouldn't reference a classic movie while writing about this film but I have to because there's a certain strange connection between both, despite the different outcome each one had. The majority of viewers of "The Canyons" might never have heard of "The Misfits" (1961), that depressive tale starring Gable, Monroe, Clift and directed by John Huston, a reunion of washed up characters that never seem to do anything right in life, and behind the scenes it was another sad story as well, becoming the final films of Marilyn and Clark, and Monty's career already in ruins, didn't get better later on. Rumor has it, the movie was on TV the day he died, someone asked him if he wanted to see it, to which he replied with a 'no'. Yet that was a marvelous picture and still interesting to watch. What's Paul Schrader movie has to do with it? It's also a story about washed up people (in and off the movie) who try to do something with their lives but only manage to complicate things. Unlike "The Misfits", this excuse for a movie is simply dull, hollow and idiotic.The same hands that wrote the great "American Psycho" and "Less than Zero" are the same that brings this movie to life. Can you believe that? Yep, Bret Easton Ellis tries to deliver a piece involving Hollywood and its nasty schemes of money, power, sex, lies, betrayal and love going out the window. In it, famous producer film Christian (porn star James Deen, trying his big break in conventional films) goes bazoork after finding out that his wife (Lindsay Lohan) is having an affair with Ryan (Nolan Gerard Funk), the leading man he selected to star in his new project. Conflict, or catch some might say: Christian doesn't mind sharing his lovely wife with other partners in orgies and wild parties as long as he's there as well, so it's kind of weird when he reacts in a psychotic way after discovering the affair. "I love you because I trust you" he says at the beginning, maybe it's the other way around, I don't know. That side of the story is pure garbage, and the more the film tries to bring sensuality or just throw some sex scene, the more embarrassing it gets. It looks like a lousy carbon copy of a softcore (and trust me, there's softcore flicks with better plot and sexy moments than this thing), the sex is just presented very briefly, with no deep connection with the story, and even the sequences involving nudity are tame, prudishly captured. Whether being a weird drama or a unsexy thriller, "The Canyons" doesn't hit right at anything. There's not even a bold or original take into Hollywood way of running things, no critique, no judgment, just the exploitation of us unfortunate viewers.I only (slightly) cared about "The Canyons" in the sequences involving Ryan, the young and struggling actor caught in the middle of complicated situations, torn about acting in a good project - but what's it about, anyway? the movie never tells us - and staying with the love of his life, the decadent actress married with Christian, and Ryan also happens to be married. Throughout the film, he spends his time trying to find ways to be in the picture, no matter the consequences (since he's a drop dead gorgeous guy, he's frequently tempted by guys who have power in the business) he fights for that role mostly because it's the only thing for him to do. Gathered here is the ultimate members of the decadent career group: Lohan post-rehab career, another low movie for her; the unlucky director Schrader - his latest ventures are quite troubled, specially with producers who remove the man cause he never delivers the movie they wanted (apparently, that didn't happen here but it happened with the fourth Exorcist and the recent "Dying of the Light") but at one time he was a gifted filmmaker and writer; and Ellis, whose script is just another proof that some novelists shouldn't write original film material. Coming out of the porn universe, Mr. Deen proves to be a suitable and good choice for the frightening character he plays, his alpha-male quality was powerful enough to make you believe this guy can do anything he wants and with anyone he wants. A little bit of acting classes and he might have a future in mainstream films. Also from porn, but just doing a bit uncredited part is Danny Wylde who should have a better and bigger cameo. The only ones who escape without injuries are Nolan Funk, quite good in some moments, and one scene stealer Gus Van Sant as Christian's shrink. Just because it's a movie about decadence filled with down and out people that doesn't mean the final project should be like them. The fore-mentioned classic is a clear evidence of this. 3/10
