Movie Review: 'Velvet Buzzsaw' Netflix at its Most Forgettable

Watching Velvet Buzzsaw I kept impatiently waiting for the movie to be good. I had really high hopes for Velvet Buzzsaw. It stars the brilliant Jake Gyllenhaal alongside a pretty creative supporting cast and has a look that reminded me of a combination of Nicholas Winding Refn meets Tom Ford. Dan Gilroy is a really talented filmmaker who directed one of Jake Gyllenhaal’s best recent performances in Nightcrawler so clearly there was a reason to be excited. And yet, it stinks!

Velvet Buzzsaw is an ensemble horror drama set in the highly pretentious world of art in Los Angeles. Jake Gyllenhaal leads the way as influential art critic Morf Vanderwalt and no, I did not misspell it, his first name is Morf. To be successful, an art gallery must have something that impresses Morf or else. Yes, there are other influential people but Morf is the one with the biggest following.

Competing for Morf’s loving gaze are a rogues gallery of artists and gallery owners. Most prominent among Morf’s ‘friends’ is Rhodora Haze (Rene Russo). Rhodora is tough and independent but she nevertheless caters to Morf. A bad review of one of her pet artists could spell disaster. Rhodora needs a hit and her ambitious assistant, Josephina (Zawe Ashton) is eager to advance in the world. It will be Josephina who sets the story into motion.

At her apartment, Josephina finds that one of her neighbors has died. This neighbor happens to have been an artist and a hermit who rarely left home. When Josephina finds one of his paintings in the hall, she immediately shows it to Morf who is blown away. She finds more paintings in the dead man’s apartment and becomes the man’s agent by proxy, stealing his work to sell to the masses.

The artists name is Vetril Dease and his paintings are haunting tableaus of death. They also happen to be cursed images and soon, those who come into contact with Dease’s work begin to become victims of his work. Velvet Buzzsaw turns on the ways in which ambition and pretension are the pretenses of death. The film isn’t opposed to ambition but when people choose ambition over morality, that’s when the Velvet Buzzsaw turns dangerous.

That’s my interpretation anyway. The actual movie, Velvet Buzzsaw, is far more vague and unsatisfying. The film keeps approaching a satire of pretension, high society and vulgarity and each time it keeps pulling back. It appears, to me, that Dan Gilroy doesn’t quite know what he wishes to accomplish with Velvet Buzzsaw. Is it intended as satire or horror or both? If it is satire then what is the target?

Veiled threats of satire are aimed in all directions but the director appears to lack the desire to actually go on the satirical attack. At once, the film wants to poke at the pretentious but the movie also appears to want to celebrate the world of art. The film is respectful to a fault when it comes to the art world in Los Angeles, as if Gilroy wished to criticize it but doesn’t want to offend any of the scenesters.

In the end, Velvet Buzzsaw is a toothless bore. The horror elements are mediocre, the characters are broad but rarely with a point and the satire has no spine or even a real target. The whole thing is vague and veiled. It’s catty without having any actual claws. The look of Velvet Buzzsaw is eye catching and demonstrates what I want to see more of from Dan Gilroy, but the story and the subtext is lacking to the point of absence.