It isn’t a surprise any more that studios left and right are nabbing up every young teen book series to put on the fast track to feature film. HARRY POTTER did wonders for struggling fantasy writers all around the world. Of course, with this level of reactive filmmaking going on, it’s a wonder that any of these adaptations end up culling together enough talent to make anything worth watching.
So, it widens the eyes a bit and makes the smile on my face a little wider when something like CIRQUE DU FREAK: THE VAMPIRE’S ASSISTANT hits theaters. While not a grand exploration in filmmaking, the film does have much to offer by way of entertainment, and it even allows some time to project a bit of deeper meaning.
Paul Weitz directs the film. For years, he and his brother, Chris, teamed on wacky comedies like AMERICAN PIE and DOWN TO EARTH and character fare like ABOUT A BOY and IN GOOD COMPANY alike. Working fully on his own for the first time (Chris executive produced Paul’s solo debut of AMERICAN DREAMZ) Paul brings a level of style to the story of a high school teen, played by Chris Massoglia, who, along with his best friend, ventures to a showing of a traveling freak show. There, the two come across a world of strange and fascinating characters, one of whom, played by John C. Reilly, is a bona fide vampire. Through a series of unfortunate events, the teen finds himself a half vampire. Now, having to leave his family and friends behind, the teen finds himself immersed in the world of the freaks, most of whom are contending with their own, real-world issues.
Weitz co-wrote the screenplay with veteran screenwriter Brian Helgeland, and, between their adaptation of Darren Shan’s series of novels, the pacing set forth by Weitz, and the editing by Leslie Jones, the film finds its biggest flaw. The pacing of THE VAMPIRE’S ASSISTANT is all wrong. Seemingly packing a story the length of a novel (the film actually tells a story strewn across Shan’s first three novels, but much is also cut out) into 110 minutes of screen time, it doesn’t seem like much was left out of the film’s narrative. Instead of excising whole scenes, something fans of the HARRY POTTER novels have complained about for years, they seem to try to pack everything into this film without giving much time for breath or reflection. Granted, you don’t need much reflection in a fantasy/comedy about a teenaged vampire, but this level of breakneck editing and sporadic scene-jumping is jarring. It takes some time getting used to.
Jones’ editing doesn’t help the process. Weitz, being the director, was surely in the editing bay overseeing this aspect of the film’s post-production, so his hands are not washed of this problem in the least. For no apparent reason, some scenes are cut completely out of sequence and other scenes are moved around in the film’s narrative for even less of a reason. This, too, gives the film a stop-and-go sensibility where comfortable escapism should reside.
Another problem with the film comes with the third act. As the first (or the first few) of a series of novels, not everything can be tied up in a need, little bow for the moviegoing public. Instead, we have another open-ended film that raises so many more questions than it even hints at answering. In fact, by the final twenties minutes rolls around, you people begin talking about wars and destinies, you may find yourself checking out altogether. It’s all window dressing for the potentiality of a sequel, one that may not even happen. If Paul’s brother, Chris, has taught us anything with THE GOLDEN COMPASS, it’s that even if your film doesn’t answer every question, it should still be able to stand on its own. THE VAMPIRE’S ASSISTANT doesn’t give us an ending as blatant or as dissatisfying as THE GOLDEN COMPASS, but the idea is certainly there.
However, once you can look past this, it’s easy to see all the film’s qualities. Whether it is feeding off its comedy or its more horrific moments, THE VAMPIRE’S ASSISTANT is anything but bland. Much of this has to do with the exquisite characters brought to life, and a majority of this has to do with the actors involved. While Ken Watanabe as Mr. Tall, the carnival barker; Salma Hayek as Truska, the bearded lady; and Patrick Fugit as Evra, the snake boy are all worth mentioning, it is Reilly who clearly steals the show from his character’s introduction.
Reilly has a wonderful way of reading his scene and knowing exactly when it is supposed to be funny or something a little more serious. He glares at Massoglia sometimes with such sincerity, but he never holds back on the laughs. Reilly is able to bring these laughs, too, without hindering his character’s mysteriousness or allure.
The same, unfortunately, cannot be said about Massoglia, who seems to be frantically holding onto the rope Reilly is continuously throwing to him. He just isn’t playing on the level that would allow him to carry a character the requires this much depth. Fortunately, though, he does generally have highly gifted actors of whom he can play off.
Pacing and computer effects issues aside, the latter of which should not go unmentioned, even if it is a slight annoyance, CIRQUE DU FREAK: THE VAMPIRE’S ASSISTANT is an and intriguing and, oftentimes, entertaining film filled with equally engaging characters. Aided by Weitz’s ability to handle the narrative’s style and the talent raised by much of the cast, the film never fails to pull out the appropriate reaction from its crowd. It makes you laugh when it intends to do so, and it raises the dramatic bar a time or two, also.
It also offers a well-intentioned and deeply focused message on what it is like to be normal and allows for a pleasant outlook on the “freaks” of the world. We are all freaks in our own way, each of us struggling to find some idea of normalcy in the world. To that end, THE VAMPIRE’S ASSISTANT is much like WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE. A comparison between the two films is unfair, but it simply aids the value of a film this entertaining to know that it has much more to offer than what’s found on the surface.
