Ruben Guthrie

Like so many Australian films, Ruben Guthrie is thin, shallow and populated by caricatures who never really threaten to turn into fully formed characters. For a few moments here and there I thought - more hoped - that it might prove to be a serious and scathing look at Australian drinking culture. And there's one scene where there is a momentary suggestion that it might have something provocative to say about the dubious cult that is Alcoholics Anonymous (and its even more dubious success rate). But no. Ruben Guthrie not only has nothing new to say, its notions of how alcohol is viewed in Australia seem a good twenty or thirty years out of date. To give but one example: everyone in Ruben's life - his boss, his father, his best mate, his mother - refuses to take his decision to quit alcohol seriously, refuses to really accept that alcoholism could be his problem; indeed, they all actively insist he snap out of it and have another drink. Yes - just like it isn't the 21st century, educated middle-class people aren't acutely aware of the dangers of alcohol, and parents, employers or best friends never respect someone's decision not to drink. This is also a film crammed with the kind of faux-dramatic gestures beloved by writers who can't actually generate genuine drama through actual conflict. At various points Ruben smashes a bottle against his mirrored home bar, throws his mobile phone into the harbour and rips his laptop into pieces... as people almost never do in real life. All this and - just for good measure - an annoying and offensive gay stereotype mincingly played by Alex Dimitriades. The direction is distractingly show- offy at times, befitting a film that is all surface and no substance. Yet again one is left wondering what the film funding bodies saw in the script that convinced them it was worth spending the nation's money on.

"Ruben Guthrie" is a strange film about alcoholism...strange because I really have no idea what it's trying to say. Still, despite this and a very strange ending, the acting is quite nice.

The film begins with Ruben behaving like a drunk frat-boy--which is sad since he's supposed to be an adult. After his latest crazy binge, his live-in girlfriend has had enough and she leaves--vowing only to return IF he manages to stay sober for the next year. Ruben's commitment to sobriety at first is extremely shallow and he doesn't think he has a problem. But, over time and after the alcohol leaves his system, he slowly comes to see that he IS an alcoholic and becomes actively involved with Alcoholics Anonymous.

Patrick Brammall is very good as Ruben and much of the script seemed very well done and seemed to have a lot of insights into not just alcoholism but how the families and friends of addicts often do a lot to try to keep the person actively drinking and screwing up their lives. But the film also seems to have lost a sense of direction and the ending is anti-climactic to say the very least.

'Ruben Guthrie' and the titular lead are, as the movie garishly opens, hard to like; but much to this viewer's surprise, by the end of the film, some empathy and affection are afforded them both. I have enjoyed Brendan Cowell's screen work on both big and small, and thought it an inspired piece of casting to have what seems like his doppelganger, Patrick Brammall in the central role. I guess it was more than enough to adapt your own stage play and direct the picture! He has cast an actor with either a brilliant ability to channel the writer/director's life force, or just maybe they are two peas in a pod, Brammall is really finding his position as one of the country's most versatile and likable actors; even here as the at times despicable title character.

The transposing from stage to screen feels fine to me; other than some at times overly heightened dialogue and performance; but I forgave those moments as being part and parcel of the over the top world of advertising and the spin off of partying and excess from the job. Has it been satirized here or made a cliché? Either way, it worked for me. I wondered how Cowell would trace the (anti) hero's journey and conclusion and along the way there are enough surprising moments to keep the viewer connected and rooting for the protagonist. Brammall chews the scenery and is equally adept in the screwball moments as the soberingly tender ones.

Robyn Nevin was fine, as ever, and especially her one to one with 'Ruben' at the bar was a truly uncomfortable scene,and reiteration of why Ms Nevin is one of the most respected and enduring actors in Australia. Harriet Dyer as the hippy chick with her own baggage, was the revelation for me; I was both intrigued and moved by her performance. It was; aside from Ruben, the most fully fleshed of the supporting players. I had a few issues with the writing and oddly pitched performance of the usually reliable Alex Dimitriades; as the gay bestie,but once on the 'Ruben Guthrie' conveyor belt, I was along for the ride; even with its occasional jarring ingredients.

This movie does have a lot to say about substance abuse and makes no easy answers or saccharine summaries to leave the viewer with. There is much texture here, and for me that is attributable to the writing and directing that Brendan Cowell delivers. It's not perfect; nor is the main character - but Patrick Brammall makes him human and flawed - just the way I like my leading characters on screen.

Brendan Cowell's previous screen writing credit was for the woeful comedy Save Your Legs, a film so poor in concept that how it ever came to production simply beggars belief.

Ruben Guthrie, fortunately, proves to be a few notches above his Indian-based cricket caper. Adapted by Cowell from his own stage play, he also directs with some confidence.

The film centres, as the title eponymously suggests, on the character Ruben Guthrie (Patrick Brammall), a high-flying advertising guru enjoying the hedonistic excesses that are perceived as integral to that profession; his persona neatly fits the acronym Lombard – a lot of money but a right dick. Enjoying the trappings of his lifestyle, he drunkenly jumps from a ledge as a stunt narrowly avoiding fatal injuries. This proves too much for his beautiful and long-suffering Czech fiancée who walks out on him but advises she could return if he can stay off the drink for a year and turn his life around. The film then chronicles Ruben's life as he attempts to do just that.

It is at this juncture that the film is at its strongest. Ruben's journey takes something of a random trajectory as he finds a lack of support from close family, colleagues and friends all of whom seem to have their own selfish motives in their dealings with him. Patrick Brammall brings great nuance to his role, injecting depth into his character and carrying the film squarely on his shoulders. The supporting cast – Jack Thompson and Robyn Nevin as the estranged, alcohol-soaked parents; Alex Dimitriades as the caustic gay best friend; Jeremy Sims as the troubled boss and Harriet Dyer as the superficial flake from the AA group who ends up in his bed are all assured in their roles. The less said about Brenton Thwaites' poorly acted, poorly written role as the new social-media face of advertising, the better.

Direction from Cowell was well-paced and cinematography was good, only occasionally let down by some sloppy editing. Locations were well chosen and Guthrie's exclusive waterfront property in which many scenes were shot, always gave the impression of being a trophy house rather than a home. His over the top bar, which amusingly stayed in situ during his abstinence, would not have disgraced the swankiest New York private club.

But at just over 90 minutes the film needed more. It lacked enough wit to be considered a full comedy and required more bite. Guthrie's story alone was not enough for a cinematic release. Although it rarely betrayed its theatrical origins, the story needed to expand to explore more themes, to perhaps satirise the advertising industry and those who inhabit its self-absorbed world. Nonetheless, the film still delivers some punches and Patrick Brammall's performance alone merits great praise.

Suffice it to say, Australian actors are almost always, in the least, competent.

But after seeing this, the only thing I can say about it is--it's competently made, is Australia-centric, allowed some decent, professional actors to make a living, and is as predictable as tomorrow's sunrise.

"Writer-Director" Cowell appears to prove, once again, that good writer-directors are extremely rare. In Crowell's case, I'd say that it's the writing part that fails here. The script is competently (yet predictably) paced, but the premise itself is about as original as a corporate ad--plenty of time to 'hit the loo', knowing that you'd miss nothing of importance no matter how long you took (sorry but it's not very much about missing any actor's glowing moment-- moments usually only recognized if the film itself is a worthy vehicle for such).

As for Cowell's direction, the danger here for any Australian film- maker, I think, is over saturation a la the 'Luhrmann Effect', in that, the wreckage Luhrmann made of Gatsby (offensive to virtually all those above the age of 'twenny sumpthin') is invisible against his previous success to any wannabe writer-director--while Cowell avoids the gaudy baubles and annoying soundtrack irrelevancies, the source of his inspiration is obvious. There are two likely outcomes for W/D's suffering from this: you either manage to pull off a unique, quirky, original film, or, in failure (as is most always the case), you mill out another ad-carrying vehicle for late-night TV.

To me, one thing I've always liked about Australian actors is their ability to provide an absorbing level of depth to their characters, juxtaposed to what I've recognized as a profound, inexplicably acute dearth of originality coming from the Great Down-Under. Give me an Australian Actor and/or DOP any day--leave the writer/directors at home.

Ultimately, perhaps it is best to view this film as a bit of worthy self-reflection for a country that still has an enormous problem with alcoholics, and that this such relevancy may be lost on outsiders, but other than that, I would never willingly pay to see this film, (I saw it for free through my streaming account) nor have wasted my time seeing it had I known what I was in for.

But in the end, what drives me to critique this and other similar films so energetically is the exasperation I feel when witnessing the waste--so many good scripts out there by competent writers will be consummately ignored by so many wannabe do-it-alls with-- unfortunately for all of us--nice-sized production budgets.

Thanks for providing a living wage for yet another film crew and decent local actors though. If this was merely something done to fill up the contract calendar while working on The Big Thing, then I can better understand.

4 Stars--for the acting and production work. .