A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III

I'll give a star for Jason Schwartzman, a star for Bill Murray, a star for Aubrey Plaza and a star for the movie as a whole.

I'm entertained by Charlie Sheen and his antics. While I can't hate the guy because I don't know him personally, I don't want to watch a movie that seems to basically reflect his poor decision making, meltdown and turn around. Too much "nothing" happened. Plenty of fantasy sequences and flashbacks seemed to just emphasize Sheen's boisterous and lady killing ways. In the end it seems like an exaggerated and far fetched Charlie Sheen Documentary. Roman Coppola works much better with Wes Anderson.

A GLIMPSE INSIDE THE MIND OF CHARLES SWAN III is just that. A quick glimpse inside the mind of a self-obsessed, sex-addicted album cover artist who's sanity and life are put into question after his latest girlfriend breaks up with him.

Charles Swan III is lightly played by Charlie Sheen, who, looking worse than ever, might seem perfect for the role but only makes it that much harder to care for the character. His mind, life and the film are a chaotic mess. His regrets, his pain and loss come off so insincere, it's boring to watch. What keeps us watching the film is the genuine laughs brought by Jason Schwartzman and Bill Murray, who play parts in Swan's real life and multiple roles inside his warped mind. It is the scenes they are in that save the entire film from being a complete failure.

Roman Coppola's bizarre odyssey never takes itself too serious, creating a world where anything goes. That, in itself, is a great achievement for a writer/director. It's hard to tell if it's Charlie Sheen's lack of a performance or if it's the written character's lack of genuine heart that holds this film back from becoming what it was hoping to be: a film for those of us who crave originality and appreciate dark chaotic comedies no one else dares to make.

A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III (2012)

1/2 (out of 4)

Writer-director Roman Coppola quickly made this thing during the time that Charlie Sheen was going through his mental breakdown. In the film Sheen plays Charles Swan, a man who gets dumped by his girlfriend and begins to act in a variety of strange ways so us lucky viewers get the chance to look inside his mind to see what makes him tick. Okay, who in the hell really cares what makes Charles Swan III tick? I'm going to steal from Roger Ebert's review of this movie and he's right when he said a movie is a sad thing to waste. Not only is Coppola's talents wasted but so are Sheen's and Bill Murray's. Mr. Murray doesn't make too many movies these days and it's rather sad to see him wasted his talents in this film. I'm really not sure what Coppola was going for, although I'm quite certain somewhere down the road this here will be a cult movie with fans dropping acid and smoking joints to it. What we've basically got are a lot of small scenes where Sheen gets to act out a wide range of things. He would be dancing, flirting, find himself in a dangerous situation or he might just be looking at the ladies. The problem is that none of these "visions" are funny and after about ten-minutes it becomes clear that you don't care about Swan or anything in his head. He's a rather boring character who I'm guessing is loosely based on Sheen but I think the film would have perhaps worked better had they really gone after Sheen and the mental state he was in when all of this stuff was going on. I think that would have been a lot more interesting than what we get here. The only reason I don't give this thing a BOMB is that I'm going to at least give the filmmakers, actors and producers some credit for at least trying something different. However, just trying something different doesn't mean you're going to end up with anything good.

The last time I was baffled by a film to this degree I had just sat through Wes Anderson's The Life Aquatic of Steve Zissou, a film to this day I can not extract anything from. Ironically, Wes Anderson and Roman Coppola, the director of A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III have worked on a few projects together and, possibly as a result, the film feels half-baked, incomplete, and inherently maddening, doing one of things that Wes Anderson did as well but at least in a somewhat bearable manner; draw its events brighter and more noticeable than the characters involved in them.

Our title character is played by Charlie Sheen, who presumably filmed this around that time where he wasn't a media figure for his outspoken drug use any longer and he was pretty much disregarded by all the public too as yesterday's news. I assume that because I'm sure it this film would've been swarmed with publicity at the time of its production, because anything Sheen seemed to do, rather it was create a Twitter account or make a disposable statement made headlines.

Sheen embodies without a doubt, the weirdest character of his career; an inconsistent graphic designer who has just been left by the love of his moment Ivana (Katheryn Winnick), and is feeling mixed emotions, frequenting suffering from terrors and surrealist fever dreams. His reality becomes twisted and indistinct, as things do not seem to have a time-frame and characters pop in and out with no rhyme or reason.

This is one of the least consistent films I've seen in a long time. A subplot, if you can call it that because the story's main plot isn't even worthy of the description of a plot, involved Jason Schwartzman's Kirby, an aspiring musician, who wants Charles to make him an album cover, but both men lack inspiration in their clearly eclectic lives.

I can't help but feel that this was the movie that Wes Anderson dreamed up but quickly abandoned when he discovered the plot didn't go anywhere quickly. Anderson is known for concocting whimsical setups, an immensely quirky environment, and framing and articulating his films' settings with impenetrable beauty and artistry. What he often neglects, although this hasn't been seen recently with his newest films The Darjeeling Limited and Moonrise Kingdom, is his characterization and situations, which are often underdeveloped or simply archetypes we have a difficult time feeling for. Writer/director/producer Coppola continues to persistently throw set pieces, situations, and stunt casting at the story, none of it generating any true excitement or nourishment for his audience members. The whole film plays as one long, tedious, incoherent stage show that goes nowhere quickly and doesn't seem to care.

Yet through all the mundane setups and unworthy payoffs, I found enjoyment in this film, mainly coming from Sheen, who is a charming screen presence here, playing a womanizing character, with a bit more of a heart and attitude than the usual snobs. But his character is still an undeveloped archetype we feel almost nothing for. And when the film gives us a maddening ending that breaks the fourth wall, we feel that either Coppola couldn't fittingly end the story or he simply got tired of the material.

A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III is, to put it simply, a mess of sizable proportions. If the film had turned its quirkiness meter about six notches down, and put as much heavy focus on its story continuity and characters as it does with detail and look, there would be a film here with some trajectory and formation rather than just scene after scene of disposable weirdness. I read that Roman Coppola hopes that those who have suffered through a bad breakup in the past or have been through rough relationships could sympathize with Charles Swan III. I'd believe that after they see this film, they'll feel that relationships are a waste of time and should get back to work.

Starring: Charlie Sheen, Jason Schwartzman, Katheryn Winnick, Bill Murray, Aubrey Plaza, Patricia Arquette, Dermot Mulroney, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead. Directed by: Roman Coppola.

The Wes Anderson link is obvious, it's less refined than his movies but in a strange way it also feels less constricted and therefore more free to go wild. Sure, it is self-consciously over-styled but it opened with a spirit that reminded me of late 60s movies like Head (The Monkees) or the kind of 'wry portrait of a groovy guy' movie that Peter Sellers could have starred in. The opening scene with Terry Gilliam style animation was promising. I was prepared to over-ride the cheese factor and enjoy an immersive ride into the quirky.

But for all the promise of ideas - it just wasn't fun enough.

The bulk of the movie (from about 20mins onwards) was basically a vague saunter through Charles breaking up with his girlfriend and thinking about making an album cover for his client/friend. Odd how the movie's initial wild spirit seemed to dry up.

Characters such as Bill Murray, Patricia Arquette, Aubrey Plaza and Jason S dip in and out of his life, all having boring conversations with him. None of them lifted it, Sheen was the best of a dull bunch. Even as you watch, so many scenes just slip through your fingers.

It feels mostly like a filmed rehearsal of a half-baked script, made using movie-world connections as if they were there as a favour to a friend. The only thing that stands out is the general plastic look and certain details (egg and bacon stickers on his car etc).

For a short movie, it really dragged. Falls uneasily between 'try hard' and 'didn't try hard enough'. Doesn't even qualify as a 'so bad it's good movie'.

And it's not even a glimpse into Swan's mind - he is impenetrable behind his permanent sunglasses - it's more of a glimpse into the mind of a movie-maker with money and connections who thought 'looking cool' was more important than deeper levels of development.