Cold Souls (2009) User Reviews

Emptiness takes on a new meaning

[moviemanMA · 7/10 · 17 September 2009]

Nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at this year's Sundance Film Festival, Cold Souls is a unique take on the human soul. We find Giamatti struggling with his acting, well, overall he is just struggling. He has dark, morbid thoughts and can't focus on his career. When a friend recommends him check out an article in the New Yorker. The article talks about soul removal and storage. Yes, soul removal and storage.

Giamatti meets with Dr. Flintstein (David Strathairn) and is convinced that the procedure might actually work. He has his soul removed, only to find that his complete physical and mental disposition is altered. The the problems keep on rolling. After trying out a rental soul, he demands to get his soul back, only to find that it has been taken to Russia through "soul trafficking". Now he must go on a search through the black market of soul buying and selling to try and find himself.

This film is one part Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, one part Being John Malkovich, and one part originality. It's a somewhat dry film with nothing that really grabs you in a special way, but it's not a boring film. Giamatti's character, actually most of his characters, are somewhat detached from the rest of the world, but never more so than here. He is the perfect choice to play the soulless man. He constantly looks depressed or discouraged, much like his character in Sideways, and his outbursts, although not as funny or powerful as Sideways, are believable effective.

What impressed me a lot about this film was the production value for a first time feature. It spared no expense in making this soul storage technology seem as legitimate as possible without going too far over the edge. Much like Eternal Sunshine, we have a foreign and completely absurd science that is made to look legitimate and believable. Sure enough it worked.

As I said earlier, the film is a bit dry. There are parts that were funny and scenes that could have been more emotional, but either the scene wasn't long enough or the images weren't strong enough. The camera work too was kind of annoying. It bumped around a lot when I would have preferred a still shot to see everything clearly.

It's not a bad film by any means. It's an interesting story with some nice solid performances by Giamatti, Strathairn, as well as Dina Korzun (the soul trafficker) and Emily Watson as Giamatti's wife. A nice little film that makes you happy to have some personality.

an almost brilliant idea, almost amazing performance, and an almost terrific film

[secondtake · 7/10 · 11 June 2011]

Cold Souls (2009)

This is a concept movie, in a way, though the concept--that you can have your soul extracted and stored in a jar so that you can live without its weight--is actually a bit thin after awhile. What drives it is not something actually heavy or surreal, about having and trading real souls, but more the idea that your soul also affects, very slightly, your personality, or your talent. So really what happens is people begin to trade or borrow souls, and they acquire a little bit of the owner's qualities. And that carries along a few consequences. naturally.

Everything is presented in a deadpan comic way. The souls stored in their foot long glass jars vary greatly, some looking like creative sculptures and others like, well, a jelly bean. Or in the case of our hero, Paul Giamatti, a garbanzo bean. (The Russian half of the cast says in joyful astonishment, "a chick pea!")

Giamatti is not my favorite actor but all my friends think he's terrific and I like the type he plays, a schlumpy everyman with Homer Simpson eyes. And Giamatti, who plays a character named Paul Giamatti, makes this movie. It isn't a tour de force, an Al Pacino or Cate Blanchett jaw-dropper, though I think it's meant to be (he even has roles within roles, with his character rehearsing a stage play). To some extent his willingness to succumb to the movie's simple, clever plot is one of its charms.

There are echoes of the absurd and the playful of two earlier (and better) movies, the incredibly inventive "Being John Malkovich" and the cinematically engrossing "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." Both of those are written by the astonishing Charlie Kaufman. Here the writer Sophie Barthes is working almost solo since she is also directing, and if it's solid it's also short of its potential, which unfortunately is so obvious. It's a great idea. And a rather good movie.

Different and interesting.

[Troy_Campbell · 7/10 · 27 November 2009]

Despite being easily recognizable, majority of movie-goers can't put a name to Paul Giamatti's face. His resume includes familiar films such as Saving Private Ryan, Cinderella Man, Donnie Brasco, The Truman Show, The Negotiator, Man on the Moon, My Best Friend's Wedding, The Illusionist, Planet of the Apes and this year's Duplicity. Then there are those lesser known films, that are arguably his best, like Shoot 'Em Up, Sideways and American Splendor. Cold Souls doesn't fit on either of those lists; it's too small to fit the former and not quite good enough to fit the latter.

It's hard not to keep the focus on Giamatti as here he actually plays himself, or at least a fabricated version of himself, which further adds to his enigmatic persona. The Paul Giamatti we see on screen is detached, withdrawn and filled with hopelessness. He seems to enjoy his obscurity yet yearns for more. How much does the real Giamatti have in common with this man? With a long line of sad sacks on his CV, is this art imitating life or life imitating art? One of the real treats with Cold Souls is you'll never know.

Writing and directing, Sophie Barthes has crafted a neat little Charlie Kaufman-esquire tale, although it becomes too self-knowing and important in parts. When she dabbles in dark humour it really steps up with the deadpan repartee between Giamatti and the equally ambiguous David Strathairn worth the price of admission alone. However, the subplot involving Russian soul-traffickers is boring and unwelcome. Barthes also deals with the futuristic concept cleverly; in this world it seems completely natural and it is not required to take a massive leap of faith for it to work.

A different and interesting, if not excellent, picture that is an ideal watch on DVD.

3.5 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)

Dark yet delightful.

[nonsequitur247 · 29 March 2009]

I saw this film today as part of FSLC and MoMA's New Directors / New Films Festival. The screening was followed by a Q&A with writer/director Sophie Barthes, who openly admitted to being annoyed by comparisons between her film and Charlie Kaufman's works. Though not entirely similar, the surrealist feel of 'Souls' is bound to draw those comparisons, and even if Barthes is sick of hearing it, I have to say, I imagine that if Kaufman and Anton Chekhov decided they should write a movie together and Michel Gondry agreed to direct Paul Giamatti in it, this would be the result.

The film focuses on Giamatti, who plays a version of himself preparing to star in Chekhov's 'Uncle Vanya' on Broadway. He finds himself tormented by the Russian material, even though it's one of Chekhov's "lighter" plays. In search of relief, he undergoes a procedure in what looks like a modded MRI machine at the hand of Dr. Flintstein (David Strathairn) which removes his chickpea-like soul from his body and freezes it temporarily until he is ready to possess it again. The B story follows a willowy Russian named Nina (Dina Korzun) who transports anonymously donated Russian souls to America using her own body as the vessel. At one point, she takes Giamatti's soul to Russia, where her boss's soap-actress wife is in need of talent and inspiration, and of course, trouble ensues.

Despite the heavy subject matter, an abundance of absurdity and wit make 'Cold Souls' amusing as well as thought-provoking. Though the tone is dark, it is not suffocatingly so--Barthes pokes fun at existential torment while seriously grappling with it at the same time. Giamatti is great as the "actor much like himself" and Strathairn and Korzun provide excellent support. The camera drifts in and out of focus in a beautiful manner throughout the film, and the French music suits the mood. The writing is solid, though the pacing is a little uneven--the film begins and wraps up a little too quickly--and the three years of hard work that Barthes poured into this clearly show.

Barthes said that she based the screenplay on a dream she had, and that while she admires Kaufman, she was more heavily influenced by Woody Allen and French Surrealists like Luis Buneal. She has infused this dark Surrealism with whimsy and absurdism to create something entirely her own, and the result prompts both pleasure and discomfort. 'Cold Souls' is definitely worth watching--I hope it's distributed as widely as it deserves to be--and Barthes is definitely a writer and director I'd watch in the future.

Messing with souls

[Chris Knipp · 7/10 · 16 August 2009]

The high-concept premise of French writer-director Sophie Barthes's first feature, which is pleasing "second-tier Charlie Kaufman stuff" (Peter Rainer), is that the soul is not only a physical organ, but can be switched, by entering a chamber as for an MRI, from person to person. The film opens with Descartes' statement that this organ is located in the pineal gland, though references to historical concepts of the soul end there. Barthes' whimsical, surreal premise is that thanks to modern technology, one can be soulless, or rent the soul of another. In 'Cold Souls'' modern-day New York, there's now a place to go to have all this done. Up to a point in this beautifully photographed film, Barthes delights and entertains with her story, which, due to casting, turns into a glorious field for Paul Giamatti to romp in. He does his trademark schlemiel shtick to perfection as the protagonist, an actor whose difficulty developing an interpretation of the title role in Chekhov's 'Uncle Vanya' leads him, tipped off by his agent and a New Yorker article, first to get rid of his soul, then to demand it back. Paul has felt too heavy. But then he feels too light. Nothing works! What a terrible mistake he's made!

The trouble with a perfect vehicle like this, however, is that the performance tends to overwhelm the vehicle. The movie, whose tone is a little mixed, has a slight story that doesn't ultimately go anywhere but back and forth within its tight limits. It's got laughs, especially early on when the premise is being presented and reveled in. Then it develops a surprising darker underside -- another, more hauntingly atmospheric shadow story that unfolds as the scene shifts from posh parts of Manhattan to Russia, where a more devious and sweatier trade in souls is going on involving desperate people and a rich gangster (Sergey Kolesnikov) with a preening girlfriend (Katheryn Winnick).

The Russian trail might have been a good moment to make some jokes about Gogol's 'Dead Souls,' but the film unfortunately chooses to skip over the vast literature on this mysterious concept. Why, or what, souls are, we do not learn. Puzzlement is even expressed about what happens to them when people die -- as if even that had been forgotten! Paul Giamatti's character, who, because this is a Charlie Kaufman knockoff, is called "Paul Giamatti," is almost good enough to be a Gogol character. His life is a Kafkaesque comedy. The clinic he goes to is run by a certain bland but somewhat suspect Dr. Flintstein (David Strathairn). When Paul's soul is extracted it turns out, to his embarrassment, to look exactly like a chickpea (not all souls look alike). It's placed in a glass jar and locked away in a deposit box. Dr. Flintstein tells him it can also be "stored in our New Jersey warehouse," if he likes. When Paul returns to his life and feels nothing, that's even worse for his acting than his previous heaviness. It also ruins things with his polite but disappointed wife Claire (Emily Watson), who doesn't recognize him any more.

When Giamatti squawks and grumbles and crumbles he delivers schlemiel arias that are fun, but tend to override the story. This is a great role for him, but the kvetching meant more in 'American Splendor' and 'Sideways,' where it had a larger context than a few short scenes with Emily Watson and some rehearsals of Vanya in various keys. With his own soul lost or misplaced, he rents the soul of "a Russian poet," and things go quite well, till this soul becomes too much for him to handle.

The sheer absurdity of the premise is taken for a good ride. Soul extraction comes to seem just one of those elective surgical procedures the well-off get themselves into -- "Paul Giamatti" is, appropriately, a famous actor, though unknown in Russia. But the darker side, though not much explored, is a clear allusion to organ-trafficking. Needless to say, this is heavy stuff for comedy, and at this point the movie shifts to something more like a surreal thriller. We're more in 'Dirty Pretty Things,' 'Maria Full of Grace,' or 'demonlover' territory. The movie has turned losing one's soul into a Kafkaesque nightmare, but an all-white, posh, air-conditioned, and giddily funny one. In Russia, it becomes pleasingly dark but no longer funny.

For the Russian side, other characters emerge, notably Nina (Dina Kurzun of 'Forty shades of Blue'), a "mule" who moves souls back and forth between Russia and New York. A bleach blond with long bangs, she's elegant and suave, but dangerously overworked. She's accumulating a potentially toxic residue of leftover bits from other people's souls, and there may not be room for her own soul anymore. Nina may remind us of Lorna, the young Albanian woman in the Dardenne brothers' new film. Later the rich Russian gangster is added to the mix. His girlfriend, a would-be actress, has had her soul replaced with what she is told is Al Pacino's. (Silly, of course, but she and Dimitri, the gangster, are nonetheless hostile and menacing.) There are a couple of poor Russian women thrown in for flavor, but even they are rather glamorous. The Russian woman poet, whose soul Giamatti winds up with for a while, has a certain morbid chic. It all ends in a beautiful long shot on a beach. (Perhaps a whole new meaning has been given to the phrase "soul mates.") This is radical soul chic, and we didn't even dream that was possible! But nowadays, mightn't it be posh just to have a soul? And does this movie itself even have one? It forgets it was a comedy, without remembering what a soul is.

A great premise that turns very cold

[napierslogs · 6/10 · 27 August 2010]

"Cold Souls" begins with possibly the best premise I have seen on film. It is fitting that screenwriter Sophie Barthes was nominated for Best First Screenplay from the Independent Spirit Awards. Paul Giamatti plays Paul Giamatti, an actor struggling with the weight of Checkov. Uncle Vanya is weighing down his soul. This is a problem afflicting most New Yorkers, but there is now a solution. A company can extract your soul and keep it in storage for you. Brilliant.

The opening scenes offer some insightful humour and intelligent wit, and offers a fair number of laughs for everybody who immediately saw the comedy in the premise. David Strathairn and Giamatti have great interactions and are very funny, both together and on their own.

The rest of movie, though, plays out like a dark mystery or thriller which doesn't really fit the wonderful comedic start. The main obstacle for our hero, and the thriller plot are significantly darker and melodramatic than I was expecting. Although it is titled "Cold Souls", I was hoping for less cold and more soul-fulfilling insightful humour.

It is a dark comedy, so probably a must-see for fans of the genre. However, I think one of the problems with coming up with such an inventive idea, is viewers will likely form their own story line, so if it doesn't play out as you would have written it, it will seem disappointing and disjointed as it did for me. But that being said, the interest and intrigue behind this story would be too much to pass this up.

Interesting Concepts

[DirtyStarling · 6/10 · 16 July 2009]

I was lucky enough to see an advance screening of this about two months ago, before it was sent to festivals.

I thought the film had some really interesting concepts with an intriguing and surrealistic story. However, there are several areas where it falls flat, and it just doesn't seem to reach its full potential.

WHAT I LIKED - The concept is very interesting, and the story is intriguing. Basically, you have a company which has found a way to separate the soul from the body and store it for you, allowing you to lead a guilt-free and soul-free life. I thought the idea of the soul as a tangible object was interesting and I found the films conception of this surrealistic idea intriguing.

• The first half of the movie is really good. This portion of the film plays very much like a dark comedy, and it works well. There is a lot of humor deriving from materialism and the trivialization of something which should go beyond the material world.

• The imagery is very good, and very surreal throughout the film.

WHAT WAS OFF FOR ME - The director doesn't seem to have a clear conception of what the soul represents or what it is. This becomes a problem for Paul Giamatti because we really don't see him behave all that much differently without his soul than he does with his soul. The movie really dances around what the soul might represent, but doesn't get there, leading to a little bit of fragmentation in the plot and a lot of logic questions.

• The actors don't seem to act any different when they don't have souls. Occasionally they do act different with other peoples' souls, but it makes you wonder what is really the big deal about losing the soul if you don't behave any differently. This may relate back to the unclear idea of the soul, but it is a drawback of the film.

• I hate it when movies just cut off without a final scene. The scene doesn't have to resolve anything. It can leave questions. But I really like films to have a final scene. This one just seems to cut off randomly. This is a personal pet peeve, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

Altogether, the film is good. If you're looking for some intellectual humor and some interesting concepts, this is a great film to watch. There are a bunch of things which were a little off-putting, but the film has lots of interesting concepts, surreal imagery, and ideas which make you think about the nature of yourself and the nature of humanity.

6/10. It's not perfect, but it has a lot of interesting concepts.

Chickpea Chekov

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 7 September 2009]

Greetings again from the darkness. I really enjoyed the originality of the basic story here, but originality is not sufficient .. this one needed some script doctoring prior to filming.

Paul Giamatti delivers another fine, hangdog, long-suffering turn as, well, Paul Giamatti. Exasperated with his general outlook on life, he does some research into the company who removes the soul from those like him. David Strathairn is the doctor at the soul removal clinic and he plays the knowledgeable, caring professional to perfection.

At different times, this one will remind of Being John Malkovich, Eternal Sunshine of Spotless Mind, and Total Recall, it never really delivers the depth or entertainment value of any of these. It's almost as if first time feature director Sophie Barthes has so many ideas that it became more important to include them all, rather than refine the best.

As for sci-fi, this one is worth seeing, but ranks behind Moon as this year's best in the genre.

Existential Science-Fiction

[filmlover16 · 10/10 · 20 August 2009]

Cold Souls: Existential Science-Fiction by PAUL CONSTANT

If you're only reading the synopsis, it's easy to see why so many lazy critics have compared Cold Souls to Being John Malkovich: Paul Giamatti stars as an actor named Paul Giamatti, whose soul is tormented by the kind of showy existential angst that commonly strikes actors, so he visits a laboratory that he reads about in the New Yorker that specializes in the removal and storage of souls. There's enough postmodern science-fiction weirdness in that premise to superficially resemble Malkovich, but Souls is more rooted in the surrealism and social commentary of Gogol. (When the film came to SIFF in June, director Sophie Barthes remarked that the title was intended to echo Dead Souls.)

Barthes is a startlingly assured first-time director: The production values are impeccable (the soul-removal facility is all gorgeous minimalism, smooth white and glass), and she coaxes better-than-average performances out of even dependably intelligent actors like Giamatti and David Strathairn. As a soulless Giamatti hilariously tries in vain to act in a Broadway production of Uncle Vanya, he comes to understand what he has given up and then decides to pursue his missing soul to Russia. You get the sense that these locations and these concepts have never been put to film before in quite such a playfully considerate way.

It's a real pleasure to see thoughtful, satirical low-budget science fiction in an American film, especially one with such a European sensibility. This is a very literary film and a very Russian film. And, yes, if you're worried, the fact that it is literary and Russian means that it is a slow movie. But it's the very best kind of slow movie, lingering unselfconsciously on the idea of what it means to have a soul. You don't often get to see movies tackle these kinds of Big Questions with such skill and aplomb; it's undeniably refreshing.

A nice, little gem

[judy-bernstein82 · 7/10 · 21 June 2009]

I read that director Sophie Barthes goes mad if she' s asked about the similarities between "Could Souls" and Kaufmann's "Synecdoche, New York". I see nothing mad about it. Both films are very similar in their "philosophical" approach and sometimes even in coverage - camera angles, pacing etc. Also Giammati's tormented soul rings the bell reminding about Hoffman in "Synecdoche". Their major difference though, is that you can still make sense of what happens in "Could Souls" and follow the plot, while "Synecdoche" sinks in ideas that are simply impossible or boring on screen. Parekh's cinematography - lyrical, but simple and to the point - is a great treat as always. Giammati's performance - lovable, if predictable. After all, a nice, little independent gem after a glass of wine in a restaurant.

Boring and uneven

[dschmeding · 4/10 · 26 January 2010]

Cold Souls is a movie that tries hard to be different and edgy... several movies like Being John Malkovich, Stranger than Fiction etc. come to mind. The movie is categorized as a comedy but in that department it falls flat with me. The movie basically revolves around Actor Paul Giamatti playing himself as a depressed man in a crisis. At first his character is really interesting but like the core idea it wears off really quick and at some point in the movie I got annoyed of watching his expressionless face. The concept of getting rid of your soul or buying others souls for different experience is interesting but didn't grip me. At first there is some humorous element when Giamatti is introduced to the concept of soul-extraction. But jokes like the soul looking like a chickpea or a Jellybean and Giamatti dropping it and searching for it like for a dropped contact lens left me with the feeling that this is supposed to be comedic but doesn't work at all. I was especially put off by the odd pacing of the movie introducing characters that I barely cared of, especially all those scenes in Russian without subtitles were annoying. There are some interesting visual shots in this movie but it all feels jammed in for artsy interest, so up until the sudden ending (although the movie felt endless) even those parts didn't work for me. All in all a big disappointment, although I liked Paul Giamattis work and will check out some of his other movies for sure.

Paul Giamatti awesome performance!

[daniela-atwood · 10/10 · 15 August 2009]

Cold Souls By Edward Havens

The easiest, and laziest, way to describe the new movie "Cold Souls" is to compare it to "Being John Malkovich." Yes, both feature a well-respected film actor playing a character named and slightly modeled after them, and find "themselves" in fantastical situations. The only other way they could be logically compared: They're both delightful and dexterously hilarious.

"Cold Souls" has a simple enough concept. Paul Giamatti (brilliantly played by Paul Giamatti) is an actor in New York City currently in rehearsals for a Broadway production of Anton Chekov's "Uncle Vayna." But with all the pressures of being famous and trying to decide which film project to choose next, Paul is having some trouble connecting to the role, and he believes he might have found his answer when he reads an article in the New Yorker magazine about an experimental process that claims to be able to remove someone's soul. Paul visits the clinic out on Roosevelt Island (an apparently soulless plot of land between Manhattan and Brooklyn, for those unfamiliar with the city's landscape, that was also used as the location of Jennifer Connelly's haunted apartment in the movie "Dark Water" a few years back) and after being assured of the validity of the clinic's claims by its founder and operator Dr. Flintstein (David Strathairn), signs up.

At first, Paul does experience a very mild sense of relief to be divested of most of his soul. (It is explained that, after the extraction process, a small amount of residual soul remains.) His sex life with his wife (Emily Watson), and his coworkers on the stage do notice a slight but immediate different with their star, but Paul is still less than satisfied. Luckily for him, the clinic does also offer the ability to borrow some souls on hold, and even luckier, there happens to be what he is told is the soul of a Russian poet at the facility.

But, alas, it goes both ways. A side plot features Nina (Dina Korzun), a Russian woman whose job is to smuggle souls between New York and St. Petersberg. Her boss's young trophy wife wants to be an actress, and he commands Nina to get the soul of one of the actors on his wife's list, which includes several A-list, Oscar-winning actors. When Nina gets to the clinic in New York, however, she discovers there is only one actor with a soul in storage. Paul Giamatti, who is not on the list. No matter. She loads Paul's soul into herself and takes it back to Russia, telling her boss and his wife it's the soul of one of the actors on her list.

Paul, in the meantime, is starting to have some strange reactions to his new soul. He starts having bizarre visions of places he's never been to and people he's never met. It isn't until he visits Dr. Flintstein to get this soul removed and get his put back in that the theft of his soul is discovered, spinning the narrative into an unexpected but still poignant direction, as he uncovers what is happening in Russia and teaming with Nina to get his soul back.

When a film stars the likes of Paul Giamatti, Emily Watson and David Straithairn, there is little chance it would somehow be a lesser effort, even with a first-time feature director. Sophie Barthes, however, has a lot more heart and... well, soul, than the average tyro filmmaker. Barthes, who also wrote the film, says she was inspired after dreaming of Woody Allen discovering he has the soul of a chickpea. It's a cute idea, and one that could have been an utter failure in the hands of a less mature artist. Thankfully, Barthes doesn't appear to be interested in paying homages or outright ripping off anything another film or filmmaker she enjoyed in the past. Barthes seems content to just entertain by making you laugh, and in this regard, she exceeds remarkably well.

Much of that success comes from having a fearless performer like Paul Giamatti willingly allowing himself to be human. The movie's Paul Giamatti is not that likable a guy on a number of occasions (not unlike Harvey Pekar from "American Splendor" or Miles Raymond from "Sideways"), and it is the rare performer who will take that chance with an audience when the vast majority of the film is riding on his shoulders. Giamatti and Barthes effortlessly guide the movie from pathos to mirth and from eccentric character comedy piece to an international hunt for the essence of what makes us human. It's also wonderful to see David Straithairn do comedy again, a genre he rarely visits and one he should return to time and time again.

Best of all, "Cold Souls" is that rare type of movie that will make you laugh at many different levels, and will make you laugh as you think about it after the movie has ended. There are several wonderfully subtle jabs about celebrity and humanity buried deep in the text, ones that (at least by this writer) will be left to the viewer to discover and reflect upon themselves.

My rating: A-

Being Paul Giamatti

[JackBenjamin · 6/10 · 30 August 2009]

If a movie's objective is to be clever, that cleverness has to be original. The acting here is great. The cinematography and direction are also expert. But it's really a soulless film. Soulless is the respect that bad acting is soulless -- it's hackneyed and refurbished.

Being John Malkovich was a dagger in our eyes, and Charlie spawned an entirely new style of writing with it. Cold Souls is pretty much a carbon copy. Both films center on actors playing themselves caught in a sort of alternate reality that's only marginally different from real reality. The difference is some tapping into a supernatural level which is exploited, clumsily, for money. Even Strathairn and Orson Bean mirror each other as quirky proprietors. There's a quest to change who you are, become literally someone else, and then at the end to return to your original self.

It's a shame because there's a lot of good material to be mined here, but so little of it is. Barthes had a chance to go in a new direction, because the seed is good, but she lacked the spark that Kaufman has, which is what makes him such a genius.

A tiresome train wreck

[madbeast · 1/10 · 15 August 2009]

I would rank this stupefyingly boring film as one of the worst movies that I have ever seen. It begins with a intriguingly fanciful premise – an actor having difficulty playing the role of Uncle Vanya resorts to having his "soul" removed by a mysterious company – yet spins it out in such a jarring and unmotivated fashion that the audience is never able to generate any real emotional connection to what he is doing or why. And while the film advertises itself as a comedy, it is as lively as a funeral march and never manages to contrive a single sequence that is able to raise even the weakest of whimsical smiles.

The actors flounder about unconvincingly, with Paul Giamatti playing himself as a spiritually dead wet blanket who fails to ignite any interest even after getting mixed up with the Russian Mafia when the situation begins to unravel, and David Strathairn draining what little energy is generated by the lifeless script in a performance of monumental insipidity. This tiresome mess begs comparison to the vastly superior "Being John Malkovich", but lacks any of the charm, invention, or dangerous hair-pin turns that made that film such a quirky delight. While "Cold Souls"' depicts as potentially an intriguing a premise, it is executed with such blandness that the meager audience in the theatre I saw the film at began filing out long before it drew to its airless conclusion.

Impressive Giamatti Performance in Futuristic Dark Comedy

[mannyrsox24 · 27 May 2009]

This dreamlike dark comedy starring Paul Giamatti is strangely hilarious at times and at other times it is moving. Paul Giamatti who plays himself in the film, is an actor in misery that is struggling with acting a soulful character in a Chekov play. He reads an article in The New Yorker about a company that can extract souls and preserve them, so one can live without a soul. Giamatti being curious decides to check it out. David Strathairn plays the soul doctor and is hilarious. Giamatti's first visit is full of humorous dry jokes as he is convinced to have his soul extracted. After feeling hollow and empty without a soul, Giamatti decides to borrow the soul of a Russian poet. Unsatisfied, all he wants is his own soul back, however it has been borrowed by the soap opera actress wife of a Russian mafioso. The way the film is portrayed is very surreal and the director did an excellent job capturing this feel. Giamatti steals the screen as he is humorous and yet can believably portray such complex emotion.

Entertaining Kaufman knock off that doesn't quite hit the mark.

[sharkies69 · 7/10 · 13 June 2009]

Just saw this at the Sydney Film Festival.

From what I've already read, director Sophie Barthes was inspired to write this by a dream. She is also reportedly tired of comparisons to Kaufman's films. What does she expect? If you crossed Being John Malkovich with Eternal Sunshine and added a sprinkle of Zach Helm's screenplay for Stranger Than Fiction you would probably end up with Cold Souls.

Barthes dream must have been a great one as the concept for the story sucks you right in. Without going too much into the details, it involves a tired and stressed actor (Giamatti) who discovers a 'soul storage' company who specialise in extracting souls.

Giamatti ums and ahs about the procedure before signing his life away, or soul away, as it may be. Needless to say, things don't work out as planned and pretty soon his wife notices his weird behaviour and there are Russians also involved in illegal trafficking of human souls.

Anyone who enjoyed Giamatti in American Splendour and Sideways should enjoy this. Carrying the film virtually on his own, he does a brilliant job as the angst ridden actor in desperate search for his soul. Emily Watson and David Strathairn do well in small support roles. Dina Korzun is also very good as the sad Russian 'mule' who swaps peoples souls for short periods to traffic them to and from the States and Russia. Unfortunately her character is never fully fleshed out which is a real shame and therein lies the problem with the screenplay. Even with Giamatti working his arse off, he ultimately can only do so much with the material. I agree with other viewers who have posted that the story is uneven and Barthes doesn't get the middle or the ending right. It's choppy and not thought out enough.

I found the film entertaining but certainly wasn't moved by it. As mentioned, the idea is a good one but I was somewhat disappointed that Barthes didn't fully explore the themes and make this as interesting as it could have been.

It's a damned fine effort though but she will have to get used to the Kaufman comparisons.

Deeply artistic....

[dude5568 · 7/10 · 8 July 2010]

Cold souls was a pleasant experience for me,well the story is a bit unusual but very thoughtful indeed.Paul Giamatti (as Paul Giamatti) plays the role of a famous actor who has been struggling with a play called 'UNCLE VANYA' and tries to find an answer which leads him to give up his soul,is this the final answer he was looking for??..or things become much complicated than before??,as i said the story is quite different and thoughtful.The movie is quite artistic in many ways,may be a little sad at times but always interesting enough to keep you involved.Paul Giamatti with an outstanding performance is very impressive...good film with a great story,better than most

Don't mention Charlie Kaufman... (whoops)

[bowmanblue · 7/10 · 27 May 2014]

Talking about Cold Souls is almost impossible without mentioning Charlie Kaufman (who wrote Being John Malkovich and other similar 'far out' screenplays). Unfortunately, Cold Souls' writer/director Sophie Barthes seems to want to distance her work from that of Kaufman's.

If you've seen Being John Malkovich you'll know the script is a back 'out there' (and if you haven't seen it, you definitely should!) - it explores weird existential themes like multiple people living in one body etc. And, whether Sophie Barthes likes it or not, or even meant it or not, Cold Souls if definitely in the same category.

Paul Giamatti plays (a slightly exaggerated various of) himself - an actor of reasonable credibility, who's having trouble getting into character for one of his plays. He hears about a company who can remove (and store) your soul, freeing you up for apparently anything.

If you can believe in the concept of removing, storing (and even selling!) your soul, then you should at least be intrigued by this film. It's part drama, part comedy and part make-you-question-the-nature-of-being, but never stays with just one of the genres for any length of time.

Naturally things don't go right for poor Paul and his soul gets stolen and he has to track it down. What follows won't have you falling off your seat laughing, nor in floods of tears, but, if you're after something that's just a little bit quirky then this one might be for you.

Bottom line: if you liked Being John Malkovich then this one may also amuse.

http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

A bleak film

[billpeter · 7/10 · 4 March 2010]

Yes, it is a comedy, but not just a black one, but a very bleak one. Bleak, like a bleak landscape, with very few features. The funny parts are few and far between. Bleak, also as in very dark. The situation that Paul Giamatti finds himself is is more dramatic than comedic, although there are some funny scenes. Funny in the way "Being John Malkovitch" was funny, but without that actor's egotism. In fact, Paul Giamatti's persona and performance are the opposite of egotistical. This really is Paul Giamatti's film, with the other actors, including the excellent David Strathairn and Emma Watson, merely foils. There is also an actress who is the "spitting image" of Scarlett Johansen. I thought that it was Scarlet playing an uncredited role - like Bette Midler in Get Shorty.

Refreshing sci-fi

[erica-tam061 · 10/10 · 17 August 2009]

Cold Souls is an off-beat intelligent, imaginative story that combines elements of sci-fi, drama and mystery. It's hard to describe - Surreal comedy? It doesn't really fit in any specific category. It's funny and sad at the same time.

Paul Giamatti delivers an incredible performance, mastering a broad range of emotions and making his character delightfully amusing and sometimes heartbreaking. The tone reminded me of Kafka, Julio Cortazar and at times Woody Allen and Kaufman. I found myself thinking about it for a long time after I saw it.

"Moon" and "Cold Souls" are refreshing the sci-fi genre this summer. There was something in both films I haven't came across in many other movies recently, a soul maybe... something different for sure.

A fun ride

[Mamabadger56 · 7/10 · 19 December 2014]

Cold Souls starts with a very odd, even silly premise and takes it as far as it will go, treating the outlandish story with perfect seriousness. As a result, the movie is more than just a goofy sci-fi comedy - although it has its funny moments. There are elements of humour, of tragedy, of suspense, and even some gangster action.

The basic story: Paul Giamatti, playing a version of himself, is an actor who is struggling with negative emotions while preparing for a role in Uncle Vanya. In an effort to resolve these issues, he submits to a newly developed procedure which removes a person's soul, placing it in storage until wanted. He is relieved of strong feelings, but runs into unexpected problems trying to conduct his life as a soulless person. The situation is further complicated by a thriving black market for donor souls.

Paul Giamatti's performance is definitely one of the best things about the film. I particularly enjoyed Giamatti rehearsing scenes from Uncle Vanya, first as his ordinary self; then as himself minus a soul; and finally, as himself with a donor soul from a female Russian poet.

This is an entertaining movie overall. The plot is full of continual unexpected twists, some funny, some rather dark, and never becomes dull or predictable.

Chickpea indeed.

[yxo-1 · 2/10 · 25 October 2009]

Soul shrinking and extraction is a swell idea indeed, but it depends on what it is for and how it is implemented. Unfortunately this important, rich and potentially exciting topic of soulfulness, was simplified and impoverished in the film. The focus on consumption vs. creativity and spirituality is a common topic for many documentary and feature films. The idea could have been executed much better and certainly could have been more believable, especially when it came to the Russian theme. Thankfully, most of the "Russians" speak real Russian. Katheryn Winnick, who according to IMDb.com "is fluent in Ukrainian" – is really not fluent in Russian. Her Russian is so heavily accented, that one wonders: could they not have found a real Russian for the part? It would not be a significant issue, if only it wasn't a metaphor for the whole movie. The story of her character's abduction is much more fantastic than the film's sci-fi premise: Sveta, the wife of the head of a criminal organization, a rich and powerful individual, could not have been abducted by a lone person, as she would have be accompanied by a pack of heavily armed body guards. The film starts with the declaration and promise of the creative development of a significant idea and finishes with a vague and bleak streak of desperation and pointless sadness.

"Better Git It In Your Soul!"

[druid333-2 · 9/10 · 25 August 2009]

...To quote the late,great, Charles Mingus. Now,onto the movie. Paul Giamatti plays...well...um, Paul Giamatti,an actor who seems to be having the worst time trying to psyche himself into mustering up a good performance in a revival of 'Uncle Vanya'. After figuring that he just doesn't have the soul power that is conducive for taking on such a plum role,he settles into a depressed funk. He reads an article about soul transplants,and decides to take a whirl at it. Paul chooses the soul of a Russian poet,and has the procedure done. Problem is, the procedure has some serious repercussions. When Paul tries to get his soul back,he finds that it has been borrowed by a Russian actress,who acts in a daily soap opera. This is a dead on,tongue in cheek,deadpan comedy/drama for the thinking person. Besides Paul Giamatti,the film's cast is rounded out by Emily Watson as his wife,Nina,David Straitharn as Doctor Flintstein,the soul specialist,and a largely unknown cast of Russian actors who turn in a fine job. Lauren Ambrose ('Six Feet Under','Swimming') has some brief, but solid time on screen as Stephanie,Dr. Flintstein's assistant & secretary. This is the Charlie Kaufman screenplay that Charlie Kaufman didn't write (so expect an occasional sojourn into surrealism). Spoken mainly in English,but with some Russian with English subtitles. Rated PG-13 by the MPAA for some brief flashes of nudity & some naughty language.

Smart, funny, and unique

[KnightsofNi11 · 7/10 · 30 September 2011]

Sometime when life is feeling a bit mundane and a bit slow, all we need is a good old existential comedy to liven things up a bit. Am I right? Well, right or not, if you're looking for your fix of existential laughs then Cold Souls is the place to look. Paul Giamatti stars as himself, a down on his luck actor who is terribly stressed about an upcoming stage performance. To try and get some answers to his life he lets a mysterious company extract his soul and store it for him. It's a melancholy dramady with a creative sci-fi twist. It's a very bizarre film but of a high quality full of clever witticism. The closest thing I can relate it to is Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, a film where the sci-fi element of memory erasing is implanted in a sincere real world drama. And while Cold Souls doesn't have the groundbreaking beauty of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, it is a very enjoyable film.

Cold Souls has that very dry sense of humor that I've always loved. It pretends to take itself seriously, essentially mocking itself at points, which is a riot to watch. Paul Giamatti does an excellent job playing himself, as ironic and strange as that is. He brings out all the subtle humor of the film which, when picked up on, is laugh out loud hilarious. At the same time Giamatti is also able to play the serious side of the film very nicely. The wacky situations he gets himself into throughout the film are plenty of fun, but Cold Souls doesn't forget about its more sincere side. It is, in a way, a mid-life crisis film in the way that it portrays its main character reflecting heavily on himself and his life. Thus Cold Souls fits perfectly into the subgenre of existential comedy. We'll just have to assume that that is a subgenre. Okay? For the most part Cold Souls is a film that holds together nicely but it does grow a bit absurd towards the middle. The plot sort of gets out of control at the halfway mark and it also slows down considerably, making less and less plausible sense as more characters are introduced. It maintains its melancholy atmosphere nicely but the plot itself gets thin and silly. Thankfully it brings it back together by the end, wrapping up the film with an open yet also cathartic ending.

I really have to give it props for being able to bring itself back to one piece after it began to fall apart in the final act. My rhetoric is probably too critical as Cold Souls really is a good film from start to finish. It isn't perfect and I look back on it as a very unique, very nutty film rather than an existential dramatic art piece. Definitely see Cold Souls as it is strange and its plenty creative. It's the kind of film that doesn't come around too often, and it provides a nice break from the mundane and repetitive nature of your average cinematic fare.

Only watch if you've no sense of humour

[fustbariclation · 1/10 · 16 June 2012]

Well, the reviews made this sound fun.

Apparently there is supposed to be humour in this film and some reviews suggest that it is even supposed to be clever.

It's a long, grinding bore. If there is anything funny about it, then it must be for people who tell jokes to appear funny and have a sense of 'humor' - nothing to do with humour.

It might help, I suppose, if you've some sort of notion that 'souls' could be real - I was expecting that it would be exposed as a silly medical/hey-wow/rip-off scam to make people think that they'd got souls. Apparently, though, this silly idea was supposed to be taken seriously.

Avoid. This is compared to the 'Being John Malkovich' film - it is equally deliberate, trivial and boring - but somewhat less annoying.