GEORGETOWN

Directing: B-
Acting: B
Writing: B-
Cinematography: B
Editing: B-

Too many actors dream of being directors. And too many of the best actors have their sights on “ascending” to the level of director, maybe because they want to be their own boss? There are plenty of cases where this works out, but arguably more often it doesn’t. Case in point: Christoph Waltz, in his feature film directorial debut with Georgetown, in which he also stars. Sure, more experience at it could make him better, but if this movie is any indication, he is better left as an actor in the hands of other directors. It’s earned him two Oscar wins, after all—albeit for his only two nominations, under the guidance of the same director, Quentin Tarantino.

Waltz is no Tarantino, and I daresay he never will be. Georgetown is a wildly different, yet far more understated and therefore less memorable, story about a D.C. con man attempting to make a name for himself among the political establishment with the help of his far older widowed socialite wife (Vanessa Redgrave) and her contacts. She’s found dead in their home one night, and of course the young husband is the prime suspect.

It should be noted that the film begins with this: This story does not, in any way, claim to be the truth. Nonetheless, it is inspired by actual events. The “actual events” are detailed in a 2012 New York Times Magazine article, “The Worst Marriage in Georgetown,” by Franklin Foer. Curiously, cited in the opening credits as the source material—although the script was adapted by David Auburn, who wrote the 2019 version of Charlie’s Angels as well as The Lake House (2006). After seeing Georgetown the film, my guess is that you’ll be far more likely to be wowed by the 2012 article. Just go read that.

Not that Georgetown is bad, on any level really. It’s just mediocre, on pretty much every level. The story, as written, is . . . fine. The performances are . . . fine. The treatment of the death at the heart of the story as a mystery is somewhat odd, given both the fact that we know from history and how increasingly obvious it is even in the film. And the film makes odd choices that make it almost pointedly less interesting than the real story, such as the fact that young Albrecht Muth was all of 18 years old when he first attempted to ask out Viola Drath in 1982, when she was still forty years married and 62 years old. That’s a 44-year age difference.

In Georgetown, these characters are respectively named Ulrich Mott and Elsa Breht, and when we first meet Mott, he’s an intern—just as Muth had been—but already in his fifties. Granted, by the time Elsa is found dead she is identified as being 91 years old, and Ulrich is still clearly in his fifties. No one ever states explicitly what their age difference is in the film, but it’s still clearly somewhere close to at least 35 years. Waltz just makes an effort to avoid depicting Mott any time in his youth, perhaps so he wouldn’t have to attempt playing that much younger than his own real age, or hire another actor.

Still: it’s less interesting. Georgetown also creates a young daughter for Elsa, who is suspicious of Ulrich from the start: “He looks like he could be my brother!” she says. The daughter is played by Annette Bening, an actress of ample talents who is entirely wasted in this part, and not just because she’s put in terrible wigs in the flashback scenes.

I wonder how many of these actors already knew each other on some level? Maybe they found the premise compelling and wanted to help out a fellow actor who is trying on a director’s hat. The spirit of giving is nice and all that, but when it comes to women actors past a certain age, both Vanessa Redgrave and Annette Bening are given thankless roles here. The entire film revolves around what a deluded conman Ulrich Mott is, and somehow even Christoph Waltz can’t make him that interesting. And this is a guy who duped countless high-ranking officials and politicians. There’s an irony on being a successful conman, when it takes that much skill and work to get there: why not just apply that same work ethic to legitimate paths to success? At leas then you won’t wind up disgraced. But, I suppose the mindset of a conman just doesn’t work that way.

Unfortunately, I’m not sure all the work that clearly went into Georgetown particularly paid off. This movie was filed as far back as late 2017, and wasn’t even scheduled for release until 2020. We all know what happened then. And after a brief Italian theatrical run in June 2020, it was punted to VOD release just this month, in 2021, three and a half years after production wrapped. That alone is somewhat telling. The movie is better than that might suggest, actually, but it’s also nowhere near its potential. I liked it okay, but I spent seven bucks to watch this on Prime Video and I don’t think you should.

A marriage of suspicion is no enough to make this movie all that memorable.

Overall: B-