(Credits: Far Out / Magnolia Pictures)
Sat 20 December 2025 19:15, UK
Ambition is a commendable trait for a filmmaker to have, because nobody wants to make, or see, movies that adhere rigidly to formula. However, the difference between ambition and self-indulgence is often razor-thin, with Roger Ebert annihilating a film that veered too far into the latter for its own good.
Audiences don’t like to be confused by what they’re watching, and only in rare cases is it to the benefit of the picture. When a writer or director has a tight grip on the story they’re telling, then a tightly-wound mystery can reveal itself to be something spectacular. On the other side of that coin, if it’s confounding without any explanation, it’s just indecipherable nonsense.
Richard Kelly’s Southland Tales fell into the nonsensical camp, and everything he’s turned his attentions to over the last two and a half decades, which isn’t much, continues to suggest that Donnie Darko was lightning in a bottle. Even at that, the vastly inferior director’s cut has given rise to the conspiracy theory that the editing team were the real maestros behind his early-2000s cult hit.
Expectations were high for his follow-up, especially when it was teased as a genre-bending, blackly comedic mystery thriller with a post-apocalyptic bent, boasting an eclectically star-studded cast that featured Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Stifler from American Pie, the most popular member of NSYNC, The Princess Bride‘s Vizzini, and professional wrestler, The Rock.
When people got to see it for themselves, though, there was nothing but silence and head-scratching. The extended version that screened at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival generated mostly puzzling reactions, but even with 20 minutes excised for Kelly’s latest director’s cut, Ebert failed to see any improvements.
As he wrote in a one-star review, he was left feeling “dazed, confused, bewildered, bored, affronted, and deafened” when the credits rolled on Southland Tales. Trimming it down didn’t make things any more palatable, with the critic describing the shortened cut as “even more of a mess,” recommending that the filmmaker “keep right on cutting until he whittles it down to a ukulele pick.”
Ebert appreciated that Kelly was “a cinematic anarchist” who was given free reign to make exactly the kind of movie he wanted; he just wished that he hadn’t used that opportunity to start “throwing bombs at his own work.” What did he make of the screenplay? “The dialogue consists largely of statements that are incomprehensible, often delivered with timing that is apparently intended to indicate they are witty.”
What about the narrative? “When I tell you I am helpless to describe the plot, perhaps you will have pity on me.” He hated it, of that there’s no doubt, but there are a hardy band of supporters who’ll defend Southland Tales to the death as a misunderstood masterpiece, and it’s even started to gather a cult following.
Does it deserve it? That depends on who you ask, although you could make the case that it boasted the best performance of Dwayne Johnson’s career until it was outstripped by The Smashing Machine.
Related Topics