Read Mixed User Reviews for The Current War: Director's Cut

4

GreatMartinOct 25, 2019

There is something wrong when an audience member (me!) in more tuned into the soundtrack than into the film. From the beginning I was aware of the music trying to make a scene more dramatic or suspenseful than it really was.

I knew moreThere is something wrong when an audience member (me!) in more tuned into the soundtrack than into the film. From the beginning I was aware of the music trying to make a scene more dramatic or suspenseful than it really was.

I knew more about Edison than I did about Westinghouse or Tesla and I did learn more about the three men but basically it is a story of men cheating, lying but, yet, being decent men.

Edison was a show-boater, brash, arrogant man who could charm reporters and would do anything to stop his rivals. Westinghouse was a more quiet man, one who believed you were a success if you left the world a better place than you were born into, yet wasn't above doing public harm. Tesla is brilliant, opinionated and a very flamboyant dresser.

There is really no suspense in "The Current War"--pun intended-- and I still am not sure if this Tesla is the man behind the present day company but I do know Westinghouse did more than manufacture refrigerators!
The performances are fine which are expected from such actors as Benedict Cumberbatch and Michael Shannon, the standout is Tom Holland as Edison's secretary.

"The Current War" is too long, ironically too darkly lit, while the score is more interesting than the story.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

BHBarryNov 1, 2019

“The Current War: Director’s Cut” was originally made in 2017 for release that year by The Weinstein Company but when allegations against the company’s President surfaced, the release date was tabled and, in the course of the bankruptcy, the“The Current War: Director’s Cut” was originally made in 2017 for release that year by The Weinstein Company but when allegations against the company’s President surfaced, the release date was tabled and, in the course of the bankruptcy, the film was modified and sold to another distributor. The phrase “Director’s Cut” was added to the title of the later version to distinguish it from the original which was shown in 2017 at the Toronto Film Festival.

This is the story of how electrical power came into being in the country in the latter part of the 19th Century and tells the competitive and almost cutthroat efforts of Thomas Edison (played by Benedict Cumberbach) and George Westinghouse (played by Michael Shannon) to fight for their respective Direct Current vs. Alternating Current means of supplying light and power to an anxious populace. The film also brings into play the role of Niklas Tesla, the visionary inventor who promoted his AC theory, as well as J.P. Morgan who served as the financial backer to the winning process. The acting of Michael Shannon is the only redeeming quality in the film for it, as written by Michael Mitnick and directed by Alfonso Gomez-Rejon, is, quite frankly, a complicated and boring film. With such a powerful story and historical importance, one would expect that those factors alone would carry the film but the script is so confusing and uneven that it makes it hard to follow and understand and, in many instances, leaves the viewer“in the dark”. I give the film a rating of 5.0 with one of the points going to Mr.Shannon for his fine performance.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

TVJerryOct 29, 2019

This film basically sets up the conflicts of 2 major American electric companies: Westinghouse and General Electric. This first was run by its namesake (played by Michael Shannon), who established an early stronghold with his use of ACThis film basically sets up the conflicts of 2 major American electric companies: Westinghouse and General Electric. This first was run by its namesake (played by Michael Shannon), who established an early stronghold with his use of AC current. GE was created to promote the DC version, advocated by the great inventor Thomas Edison (Benedict Cumberbatch). Toss in dapper foreigner Nikolai Tesla (Nicholas Hoult) for a 3rd visionary's ideas. The film details the development of their systems and the fight to determine who will power our country. As so, it's more an interesting history lesson than an involving drama. There are scant insights into the personal struggles, but not enuff to create any sympathy for the characters. NOTE: This was originally released by the Weinstein Company, but not sanctioned by the director. Obviously, this is his version.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

AxeTOct 25, 2019

An independent release yet expensive lavish period production with capable cast the subject is compelling to anyone interested in invention, technological history, and the business of genius.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

fgallindoJan 25, 2020

Which electrical system will light up the United States? Westinghouse and Tesla’s AC system, or Edison and Insull’s DC? A great story capable of illuminating the steps of future entrepreneurs on how to deal with the government, the financiersWhich electrical system will light up the United States? Westinghouse and Tesla’s AC system, or Edison and Insull’s DC? A great story capable of illuminating the steps of future entrepreneurs on how to deal with the government, the financiers and the great public of their future innovations, however the script does not have a point of gravity, runs around many attractors and ends up as an Internet search with many keywords.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

JLuis_001Feb 11, 2020

I don't know what bothers me more about this film. The misuse of its cast or the squander of such an interesting subject.

This film is as boring as it is inoperative. Regardless of all the problems it faced with the distribution, it's clearI don't know what bothers me more about this film. The misuse of its cast or the squander of such an interesting subject.

This film is as boring as it is inoperative. Regardless of all the problems it faced with the distribution, it's clear this was damaged from its inception.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Bertaut1Oct 26, 2019

Well acted and reasonably engaging, although there's a significant disconnect between form and content

When The Current War debuted in a near-completed form at TIFF in September 2017, it was considered a major contender for the 2018 AcademyWell acted and reasonably engaging, although there's a significant disconnect between form and content

When The Current War debuted in a near-completed form at TIFF in September 2017, it was considered a major contender for the 2018 Academy Awards. Scheduled for a prime awards-season release and with a number of heavyweight producers, Harvey Weinstein was overseeing the assemblage of the final cut in October when he was accused of sexual assault, and when he abandoned the project, the November release was shelved. So now, it's finally been released with director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon re-editing it, adding five additional scenes but trimming the overall run time by 10 minutes. Is it worth the wait? Well, it's competently acted, reasonably entertaining, and moderately informative, but.... It's certainly not as bad as a lot of critics have made out, but there's no denying that Gomez-Rejon over-directs, with a lot of the aesthetic drawing attention to itself, primarily because the elaborate direction is so out of sync with Michael Mitnick's by-the-numbers script.

Telling the story of the "war of the currents", the race between Thomas Edison (Benedict Cumberbatch proving once again that he can't do an American accent) and George Westinghouse (an uncharacteristically non-psychotic Michael Shannon) to "light America". Whereas Edison favours large-scale low-voltage direct current (DC), Westinghouse favours high-voltage alternating current (AC), using transformers to step down the voltage. Edison's is the safer of the two systems, but so too is it more expensive, with a limited range compared to AC. The rest of the film takes place over the next 13 years as the two men come into direct conflict, culminating in 1893 as each attempt to secure the contract for the Chicago World's Fair.

The most immediately notable aspect of The Current War is Gomez-Rejon's direction. Watching the film, I was reminded of Adrian Martin's 1992 article, "Mise-en-scène is dead, or the expressive, the excessive, the technical and the stylish", in which he divides mise-en-scène into three broad categories: classical ("in which there is a definite stylistic restraint at work"), expressive ("general strategies of colour coding, camera viewpoint, sound design and so on enhance or reinforce the general "feel" or meaning of the subject matter"), and mannerist ("performs out of its own trajectories, no longer working unobtrusively at the behest of the fiction"). The Current War is a good example of mannerism.

Some of Gomez-Rejon's aesthetic choices are definitely justified, but a lot are in the service of nothing but themselves. An early example of a justified decision is a shot looking directly down on an elaborate circular light demonstration by Edison, instantly showing us his theatricality, plus the effectiveness of the demonstration. Introducing Westinghouse, a lengthy single-take shot follows him as he weaves his way through a throng of guests at a ball, with virtually everyone trying to catch his attention. This establishes him as a man of influence, but one who abhors the spotlight. In a later scene, Gomez-Rejon shoots Edison and his family in a train carriage using a fisheye lens. With Edison on one seat and his wife and two children facing him, the wide lens distorts the space between them unnaturally, mirroring the theme of Edison neglecting his family.

On the other hand, so many of his choices are hard to rationalise. In their 2001 book, Studying Contemporary American Film: A Guide to Movie Analysis, Thomas Elsaesser and Warren Buckland say of the mannerist style, "style is autonomous, for it is not linked to function, but draws attention to itself. In other words, style is not motivated or justified by the subject matter, but is its own justification". This is as apt a description of large portions of The Current War as you're going to find. The plethora of Dutch angles, for example, are more often than not arbitrary. So too the use of split-screen, which is used without rhyme nor reason.

The handling of the characters is also problematic. Cumberbatch plays Edison as virtually identical to his portrait of Alan Turing in The Imitation Game (2014), and the film has a habit of downplaying the supporting characters. The worst example is Nikola Tesla (Nicholas Hoult), who is very much an afterthought, so under-developed that one wonders if it would have been better to leave him out altogether.

Nevertheless, as serious as these problems are, I rather enjoyed The Current War. It was never going to be the kind of Oscar contender that was intended, but the behind-the-scenes turmoil and the critical mauling are not necessarily indicative of an inherently bad film. Sure, the script is weak in places, and Gomez-Rejon employs every camera trick known to man, more often than not without knowing why. But for all that, it kept me interested, and I did, for the most part, enjoy it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

KenRJun 6, 2021

The Current Wars – Edison, Tesla V/S Westinghouse but Watt Happened?
With startlingly good images that begin from the very first scene, you feel you’re in for a terrific viewing experience. It’s filled with superb production design (as goodThe Current Wars – Edison, Tesla V/S Westinghouse but Watt Happened?
With startlingly good images that begin from the very first scene, you feel you’re in for a terrific viewing experience. It’s filled with superb production design (as good as you’ll ever see) but within the first 20 mins the rapid editing begins to make your eyes spin and your brain wants to go to sleep. Seems this was re-edited following its first audience test screening - in a valiant attempt to save it from boredom. How could this fascinating subject, involving two of history's modern heroes (actually three with Tesla’s sad story!) working on a life-changing invention that will alter every life in the world forever - ever become boring? Sadly it does, by being stifled with ‘Style over Substance’ and an overbearing score. While aiming for an award-winning look, somehow the filmmakers forgot to keep their subjects as the main focus of the audience. It’s a tremendous fact-based story and deserved to be told in a fashion that compelled the viewer to be riveted throughout. Many may find themselves left at the halfway mark, if they make that far, others may need a second viewing in an attempt to wade through the frenetic maze. Having Scorsese’s name on the credits is no help - he often hinders projects with unnecessary style, as might be partly the case here. With all the talented names involved this should have been a masterpiece but ends up as an interesting failure.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

DrandyOct 15, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Martin Scorsese was listed as Executive Producer of this film, which I found reading the credits at the end. Indeed, some scenes reminded me of "Hugo" in that they involved obvious CG renditions of seemingly real-life locations. This was mildly annoying to me, but in all the film was visually pleasant. Benedict Cumberbatch and Michael Shannon radiated their usual impressive charisma in their roles of Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse. The other actors in the film did not (could not?) match their intensity. I came to the film already knowing the story of AC current winning the war against DC, and maybe that is why I found the film's writing to be somewhat formulaic. It also gave short shrift to Nicola Tesla, as fascinating a character as the history of technology has produced. However, the film finished strong and the dialogue between Edison and Westinghouse at the Chicago World's Fair moved me. I was amused by the elephants popping up recurrently, as Edison famously was rumored to have electrocuted one in real life. However, that controversy did not ultimately appear in the film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

risonyeongAug 21, 2021

obviously not a bad show. acting is good with so many veterans on board. however, it could not rival the off-key Tesla, by ethan hawke. incidentally i watched both of them at the same time thus the character Tesla whom no one knows much aboutobviously not a bad show. acting is good with so many veterans on board. however, it could not rival the off-key Tesla, by ethan hawke. incidentally i watched both of them at the same time thus the character Tesla whom no one knows much about because of Edison.
Tesla was a much better movie because it was so mysterious and the clever use of theatrical magic was indeed refreshing.
current war however is a much standard fare and a fail safe mega movie production. It was a good history lesson btw and first time i heard of westington.
how ironical history is. Now only Tesla survived to become a behemoth.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews