“She jumped off the freeway overpass, landed on a flatbed truck heading to Mexico, her body got stuck in customs for like a week before Nina’s husband could even claim it. Way to go Nina.”
Two words—expected more. For Daniel Barnz’s “Cake,” I expected so, so much more. Despite Jennifer Aniston’s career-redefining role, the film limps along through its 102-minute run time, creating the illusion of something more to come. When the film’s big reveal finally arrived and the central plot points were all tied together, I realized that the only thing revealed was a load of disappointment.
“Cake” stars Golden Globe-nominated Jennifer Aniston as Claire, a woman struggling with chronic pain, drug addiction and an unknown traumatic event (the disappointing reveal). The rest of the cast is made up with promising additions like Sam Worthington, Anna Kendrick, William H. Macy and Chris Messina — a treasure trove of talent that was severely misused. But to reiterate, Jennifer Aniston was great. For her, this film delivered on all the levels that a somewhat washed up and forgotten actor needed. She explores a much darker role than we’re used to seeing and completely transforms her appearance, to the point of being almost unrecognizable. Should she have been placed in the best actress category for the Golden Globes? Probably not, considering the mesmerizing performances she was going up against, like Reese Witherspoon in “Wild” and Julianne Moore in “Still Alice.” But what’s done is done, and she neither won nor received an Oscar nod.
The one remarkable thing about “Cake” is how unremarkable it becomes after it sits in your head for a few days. When the film wraps up and the credits roll, for a moment you’re duped and you think, “Hey, that was pretty good.” But as time goes on and you try to reach back to the film and remember the “good” parts of it, you realize that there really aren’t any. There’s nothing memorable or notable, which is exactly what defines a bad movie.
Even on a technical level, there still isn’t much to say. The filmmakers took a traditional approach—no fancy narrative, no extravagant cinematography or sound design. Combined with the predictable script of a protagonist finding her way back to the true meaning of life by befriending strangers (dramatic sigh), the traditional filmmaking didn’t do the movie any favors and resulted as just being plain boring.
Despite all this, “Cake” did have some darkly humorous moments. But even still, these moments were few and far between.
The major issue with Barnz’s film was that it was trying too hard. It was too focused on creating the long-adored atmosphere of films like this year’s “Wild,” or 2013’s “Short Term 12.” “Cake” thinks too highly of itself, and it is in this flaw where the film truly drops off and fails.
With its shallow character development, anticlimactic plot lines and zero technical achievements, “Cake” falls flat. Its high promise and high expectations resulted in a massive disappointment. If the filmmakers had decided to strap in and actually do some creative thinking, rather than recycling age-old narrative devices, the film might have had a chance.
Contact CU Independent Managing Editor Xandra McMahon at Xandra.mcmahon@colorado.edu.
