Disappointing Supposed Classic of the Week - 'Leaving Las Vegas' (1995)

I've long avoided Mike Figgis's Leaving Las Vegas as I thought it would be the filmic equivalent of being dragged through a hedge backwards. What would normally follow that sentence is a 'Boy, was I ever wrong', but it turns out preconceptions are, at times, spot on.

For those who don't know, the story follows an alcoholic scriptwriter (Nicolas Cage) who goes to Las Vegas to drink himself to death after he loses his job. Shortly after arriving he 'befriends' a prostitute (Elisabeth Shue) - who of course has a heart of gold, because apparently that cliche wasn't old yet in 1995 - and they strike up a non-interference pact: she won't stop him drinking, he won't judge her career choice.

The film was lauded at the time of its release for the gritty cinéma vérité performances. Roger Ebert held it in particularly high esteem, putting it at #8 in his 'best of the decade' list. I think the problem with watching it so many years later is that we know the ticks and mannerisms that an actor uses. The less accomplished the actor, the quicker these reveal themselves. We're all well used to Manic Cage; practically Nicolas Cage's default setting these days - although there was a brief blip when he bothered to act: Adaptation (2002). Because of this the performance no longer feels raw and grounded; instead it looks like an actor using his limited resources to bother the Academy (the Oscars) for a nomination. Elisabeth Shue doesn't fair much better. The character isn't believable for more than five second stretches, and if it were, Shue is even less credible as a prostitute than Julia Robert's ever was.

Behold! Manic Cage!

                                                                                                 
Practically everyone in the film has sped towards irrelevancy since making this: Figgis hasn't been on anyone's radar since his digital experiment Timecode; Shue had a few lead roles post-Vegas, but was immediately forgettable in each one, and has since only cropped up in bit parts; Julian Sands, who plays Shue's pimp in the film (a job the filmmaker doesn't seem to really comprehend), hasn't been good in anything, ever, but is somehow still turning up in the odd minor role; whilst Nicolas Cage... Does anyone really care about Nicolas Cage at this point?

Overall: 2/10

I'd give it 1, but the film isn't hateful or moronic (and I've seen plenty that are), and it's credibly shot and edited. Everything else: not so good.