Review: Lovelace

The story of Linda Boreman (Amanda Seyfried), a somewhat naïve young woman still living with her strict parents (Robert Patrick and Sharon Stone), and who becomes involved with Chuck Traynor (Peter Sarsgaard), who she quickly marries. This turns out to be a mistake, as the slimy charmer Traynor pressures her into starring in a hardcore porn movie called “Deep Throat”, after discovering Linda (now called ‘Linda Lovelace’) has a special ‘talent’ for fellatio. The film becomes an enormous success and a talking point/punchline for TV comedians…but Linda sees practically nothing of that success, with opportunistic Traynor controlling her finances, as well as being physically abusive towards her. Meanwhile, her conservative parents feel ashamed/embarrassed of her, and her mother will no longer allow her in her home. Hank Azaria plays “Deep Throat” director Gerry Damiano, Bobby Cannavale plays Damiano’s cohort Butchy Peraino, whilst Chris Noth plays the principal backer of “Deep Throat” (<cough> Mafia <cough>). Adam Brody plays “Deep Throat” co-star Harry Reems, James Franco portrays Playboy founder Hugh Hefner, and Don McManus plays a sleazebag Traynor tries to pimp Linda out to at one point.

 

I can’t say this 2013 biopic of the troubled “Deep Throat” star from directors Rob Epstein & Jeffrey Friedman (best known for the overrated documentary on gay cinema “The Celluloid Closet” and “The Times of Harvey Milk”) and writer Andy Bellin particularly interested me all that much, but at least it’s not the total shrine to Linda Lovelace that I was dreading. She’s still seen rather sympathetically (and some of that is definitely justified), but the film doesn’t touch too much on the claims that Lovelace was ‘raped’ in every scene of “Deep Throat”, claims that Ms. Lovelace really ought not to have ever made, in my opinion, not that you or I were there at the time. I come to the film with a bit of a bias against her for these claims (like Traci Lords, she pretty much sold her porn colleagues out, though I think Lords was far more calculating and duplicitous), but believe me, that’s not the problem with this film at all. Hell, even if I do find the idea of Lovelace being an impressionable innocent to not portray the whole story (this is a woman who, depending on who you believe, agreed of her own volition to perform sex acts with a dog at one point. I wish I was making that up), it’s through no fault of actress Amanda Seyfried, and I absolutely believe that Chuck Traynor was every bit the scumbag that the film and the excellent Peter Sarsgaard portray him to be (His subsequent wife Marilyn Chambers seems to think Lovelace exaggerated abuse claims considerably, though). But the film itself, and particularly the screenplay aren’t terribly compelling or original, and I still feel more sorry for late actor Harry Reems, director Gerry Damiano, and maybe even Hugh Hefner, than Lovelace, outside of her abuse at the hands of Chuck. True story or not, the Traynor-Lovelace relationship is far too reminiscent of the Dorothy Stratten story “Star 80”, and giving that film’s co-star Eric Roberts a cameo as a detective here just reminds me of that film even more. There’s nothing new or insightful here, and I think the Bambi Woods (star of “Debbie Does Dallas”) Story would’ve been a better one for a film to be centred around. For starters, what the fuck ever happened to Bambi? No one really seems to know. That’s a compelling hook right there.

 

Lovelace isn’t entirely sympathetic, nor is she particularly interesting. I fully believe she was abused by and convinced to do porn by Chuck (but maybe not coerced), but don’t give me this ‘porn ruined my life’ crap, that was just Lovelace trying to hop on the feminism bandwagon when her career crapped out. Chuck ruined her life, if her life was indeed ruined.

 

The film is also far too choppy and short to tell its story anyway, and in a way I feel the film glosses over Lovelace’s less admirable traits by omitting her infamous claims of being raped on film. I was glad the film didn’t dwell on it, but only because I didn’t want the film to paint Lovelace as entirely a victim. There should’ve at least have been some mention of it, though. The second half, meanwhile is mostly uninteresting because it largely replays a lot of scenes we have already seen, but with Traynor being even nastier. That was a really dumb screenwriting decision right there because there aren’t enough nuances or differences between the two halves of the film to make such an approach seem necessary. But at least when the film plays Lovelace for a victim, it plants the blame almost 100% on Chuck rather than anyone in the industry, which is fair enough to me.

 

Peter Sarsgaard, as I said, is really terrific as the repugnant Traynor, whilst Amanda Seyfried does a good job with this role as written. She doesn’t look remotely like Lovelace (who was well-known for not being a ‘looker’), and has a magnificent, sexy body that far eclipses Lovelace’s (Yes, you do get to see Seyfried’s tits, and they’re truly beautiful), the girl is far too pretty. She has been blessed. However, objectively speaking, she plays the role well. Even better than Seyfried are the supporting turns by Hank Azaria and especially a moving Robert Patrick, who maximises his few minutes on screen. Azaria sounds a bit Moe-like, but that’s somewhat true of the real Gerry Damiano, and Azaria even looks a bit like him. Debi Mazar has a very telling small role as a somewhat wise makeup artist/actress on “Deep Throat” that may be the best work of her career (Although I’m rather fond of the clip for Madonna’s ‘True Blue’ as well). Chris Noth is surprisingly good as a financier of “Deep Throat”, I never knew the usually bland actor had it in him.

 

It has to be said that the directors have some fun with the casting here, having Mr. Big (Noth), “Basic Instinct” star Sharon Stone, “Brown Bunny” actress Chloe Sevigny, “Star 80” slimeball Eric Roberts, and “American Beauty” co-star Wes Bentley (as a photographer- think about it!) all chosen to appear here for obvious reasons. But that doesn’t mean that their performances are all good. An unrecognisable Stone, for instance, never feels authentic, you can always see the wheels turning. Character acting isn’t really her thing, I guess. Meanwhile, James Franco plays Hugh Hefner as James Franco, and the result isn’t good. He looks a little like a young Hefner (sort of), but the performance is just too silly for words. Franco is talented, but sometimes I’ve gotta wonder just what the fuck goes on inside that head of his. His resumé suggests a man of not terribly sound mind. Although he gets some of the vocal inflections right, Adam Brody is a similarly minor disaster as Harry Reems. He’s not remotely hairy enough (Reems looked more like Geraldo Rivera than Adam Brody), and looks far too boyish and far too Seth Cohen-ish. Sorry, dude, you’re still the guy from “The OC” to me.

 

True story or not, you’ve seen most of this done before, and some of the casting is more convincing than others. This isn’t an especially interesting or insightful story (Millennium Films’ involvement says a lot), and the repetitive second half is really regrettable. I think the 2005 documentary “Inside Deep Throat” tells the story much more interestingly, convincingly, and comprehensively (And check out the doco “Linda Lovelace’s Loose Lips” hosted by Legs McNeil, which is similarly convincing and comprehensive, including talking about the infamous dog movie). Still, Amanda Seyfried makes for a far more glamorous Linda Lovelace than the real thing (which may or may not be a positive, depending on your viewpoint), and Peter Sarsgaard makes for an excellent scumbag. It’s watchable, especially if you’re not terribly prejudiced against the title character. And it mines more humour out of people’s reactions to Lovelace’s ‘talent’ than you could likely imagine.

 

Rating: C+