CQ by Roman Coppola (Review)

I finally got around to seeing CQ, a movie I’d read about awhile back and was intrigued by. On the surface, it’s your standard pretentious indie film about the true nature of cinema and its interaction with real life. One scene has the main character, a meek film editor who’s trying to make a “real” film about the truth of his everyday life, engage an inner dialog with a group of movie critics, during which there’s a quick overview of just what constitutes a good movie. Kind of gutsy, if you ask me.

However, what keeps the film from sinking to low into pretense is the film’s nod towards classic fare like Barbarella and Danger: Diabolik, right down to the skimpy outfits, gaudy sets and gaudier effects, spaced out music, and John Phillip Law cameo. And no, it’s nothing like Austin Powers, so don’t even bother.

In some regards, I was reminded of John Waters’ Pecker, another movie that pokes fun at artistic endeavors to document truth and beauty through the mundane. Like Pecker, there are some really interesting and downright hilarious scenes. But it always seems like these sorts of movies (that being movies about movies) shoot themselves in the foot.

In CQ’s case, I get the sense that the movie’s sole purpose was simply to let the director (Roman Coppola) sum up all of his feelings about cinema, to put his mission statement (of sorts) out there so you know where he stands. In and of itself, that’s not a bad thing. But after awhile, the dialog about art and life and what reflects the true nature of what gets a bit tedious. And for all of the movie’s dialog about a good movie needing a good, solid ending, that’s one thing that CQ lacks (or maybe it’s supposed to be ironic, which I guess is cool).