Vox Lux

There are great movies every year, but every so often there’s a movie that’s not only great but new, that advances the form a little, that pushes movies to a different place. Such movies get remembered as the thing that happened in cinema that year. The thing that happened in 2018 is Vox Lux.

You should prepare to be wowed by Natalie Portman, who delivers a take-no-prisoners performance as Celeste, a swaggering rock diva who tends to burn down everything in her path, especially when she’s crossed.

Even if it doesn’t quite go beyond the bubblegum, Corbet’s fusion of A Star Is Born melodramatics with art-house stylings is cold, raw, dark filmmaking. And Portman, like her quiff, is an acquired taste but immense.

In the end, all the sorrow and horror and anger and angst just seem pointless despite Corbet’s stated intention to juxtapose the meaningless against the tragic.

Vox Lux does at least try to confront an undiscussed truth about today’s pop culture within a sociopolitical context. Plus, Portman and Raffidy (as well as Stacy Martin, who plays Portman’s unappreciated sister Eleanor) deliver solid performances in this relentlessly, effectively miserable narrative.

An imagined biography of a fictional pop star, the film is ambitious in its structure but only occasionally flickers into life.

Vox Lux sets up its main character as a beneficiary of tragedy, opening up a compellingly macabre narrative about how school shootings are becoming so commonplace that they can effectively serve as launchpads for stardom. But that idea goes nowhere, as Vox Lux proceeds to play Celeste's experience in the music industry mostly straight.

The songs written by Sia are excellent in themselves and never drift into simple pastiche. Scott Walker once again provides a striking, pounding orchestral score. With Vox Lux, Corbet has delivered a towering film, a unique uncompromising vision that reveals the darkness on the edge of town that lurks in the depths of the spotlight. It’s funny, thrilling, deadly serious and achieves genuine depth.

Natalie Portman stars in this story that doesn't come to deliver an innovative story. After all a lot of films talking about the dark side of fame have already been done before. And even if the comparison isn't the most fair, it can be said that this film has some reminiscence to Black Swan. But this film isn't Black Swan and the narrative is not the most dynamic, especially because there are moments where it's inevitable to think this story is a bit overloaded with pretentiousness. But it manages to save itself and become more enjoyable because of the work of the actors and the music. As I said, Vox Lux doesn't come to re-invent anything but it does feel more sustantial than other films that deal with the same theme. Especially because Portman's character isn't someone devoted to her art but someone who doesn't have more than that because of the decisions she took for her life. Therefore that side of the story doesn't fall into a cheap romanticism of dreams and illusions of an artist who began at the bottom and then made it big, and that's perhaps the greatest strength of this story.

It's literally a movie in 2 parts. The first part is outstanding - high drama with the school incident, and Raffey Cassidy is outstanding as young Celeste. Her getting in the music biz, learning the studio and the dance moves were all compelling. Even the music video was "cool" and edgy. As soon as the movie jumps 16 years later and Portman takes over as Celeste, the air is let out of the balloon. The story from then on simply isn't compelling at all. And the last 10 minutes is flat BORING. Which is crazy given what's happening there. It's a bummer to say this because I really do like Natalie Portman. She was super likable at a Q&A she did tonight at my theater. (The writer/director, on the other hand, pretty much flat-lined it.. But maybe that's just his personality.) Is it worth seeing for the first half? I'd say so. But just don't go in with any crazy-high expectations.

This is a typical movie that critics like but for audiences widely I think it will be dividing. For me personally it was too boring, even though it started out really intriguing and I get the idea of the movie, to show pop star's life from their side kinda and what they go trough and some extra stuffs to it, for me that was too boring, mainly because - not that much into these kind of movies and for me it got boring too often so I eventually just skipped through it (I did watch more than half of it). I think that people will for sure like it if they like Sia's music, or are interested in lifes of popstars and what not or like the actors playing it (acting is quite good in this anyway). But take that away and I think this for average viewer is not really that exciting. For me this was kind of movie I ended up watchin half way through and thinkin - will this be another of the movies I watch whole movie and think why didn't I switch it off earlier - so eventually I did skip through it and yeah, for me I felt good that I did not watch the latter part fully. Having said all that, this movie in my view is for certain type of people and I get that some enjoy it - to each their own. But for me this is a pass (giving it 3, because the idea overall to me felt good at beginning of the movie and like it did have good acting and interesting beginning kinda)

(Mauro Lanari) In the period between the US school massacres and September 11, "a portrait of the 21st century" symbolized by the life of a Faustian popstar ("One for the money. Two for the show. Three to make ready. And four to go"), reincarnation of Nina from "Black Swan". Corbet's ambition is boundless, the result detestable: histrionics and arrogance to build an apologue on the faults of lightheartedness, an allegory that is all too obvious and discovered on the intrinsic guilt of what looks away ("I don't want people to think" - Celeste declaims - "I just want them to feel good"), denunciation of a world whose superficiality is largely replicated.