Review: 'The Adderall Diaries' fails its drug test
Posted Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 3:44 PM Central
by John Couture
If there's anyone that could challenge Eric Roberts or Danny Trejo for their crown as king of the B movie, it might be James Franco. It's no secret that Franco has kept a pretty full dance card these last few years, but quantity does not always translate into quality.
Take his latest vanity vehicle The Adderall Diaries, for example, not only did he star and produce the film, but he chose his film school classmate Pamela Romanowsky to adapt and direct the project. This film was her first solo directing effort and at times it's pretty obvious that the filmmaker was learning on the job.
Just how bad was the end result? Well, author Stephen Elliott famously distanced himself from the filmed version saying that "almost nothing in the movie is 'true' — in terms of both the source material, as it was published, and my life, as it has been lived." Of course, he did get paid for the rights to the book, of which he shows his gratitude for many times, but he does have some legitimate gripes.
His main takeaway seems to revolve around the many liberties they take with the source material while still calling the film a memoir and based on a true-crime story. I have not read the book and unlike Stephen Elliott's thought in the story that perhaps people will now seek out his written words, I'm less likely to read one of his books after watching The Adderall Diaries.
Blurring the Lines
The Blu-ray contains a special featurette called "The Adderall Diaries: A Director’s Perspective" in which Pamela Romanowsky tries to rationalize the choices that she made by relying on the subjective nature of memory. The only real issue in that argument is that they are selling the film as an adaptation of the book, which in itself was a memoir.
Had I not read Stephen Elliott's article in Vulture, then I would have deduced that the adaptation was a faithful one, especially considering that James Franco's character is named Stephen Elliott. While the original author poses the same question, it remains true, why does Franco's character need to be Stephen Elliott? The film would probably work a lot better if the author was a fictional creation, which would help to sell the blurry edges that Romanowsky throws at the viewer.
Going too Far
Everything about the film is exaggerated to the point where we stop questioning what is real and simply stop caring. The whole idea that memory is subjective and two people can have very different remembrances of an event makes for compelling subject matter. However, when you completely undercut the reliability of any character in the film, the viewer ends up awash in a sea with no frame of reference to escape.
Put simply, it requires more effort than the film is worth to try and deduce any sort of logical enjoyment. If that wasn't enough, the film takes a bizarre 180 in the last act and tries to force-feed the audience a saccharine ending that is not only unfulfilling but so far-fetched that you completely undermine everything that the characters went through up to that point.
Yes, I can suspend disbelief, but like everything else, there is a limit to that suspension and The Adderall Diaries tests that limit many times. I don't buy that Stephen and his father are able to *spoiler alert* bury their long-gestating feud and become chummy, especially after his dad basically ruined his writing career. But don't worry, that has a happy ending as well when Stephen is miraculously able to solve his writer's block and write a book in record time.
It's Not All Bad
While it might seem that I'm being overcritical, there are several bright spots in the film that make it more than worth the watch. The character of Lana Edmond, played by Amber Heard, is an interesting passenger on Stephen's descent into his own personal hell that comes to a head during a sexual trust experiment that almost ends tragically. Heard's vulnerability in that scene speaks volumes to her acting chops, which I had questioned up to this point.
I really wanted them to explore the ramifications of this moment, but instead, we get a feeble interaction that only serves to move the plot and push Stephen closer to his goal. The introduction of this sort of sexual vulnerability should have been given a better resolution, because as it stands it just feel gratuitous for the shock value and does little to move the plot or develop Stephen as a likable character.
Without a doubt, the best thing about the film is Ed Harris' performance as Stephen's estranged father. He brings a level of sincerity to his performance that is just lacking from the much younger James Franco. That's not to say that I'm a Franco hater, but he seems to basically play himself in every role and his charm is starting to wane.
Overall, The Adderall Diaries is a very uneven film that introduces some interesting ideas, but it fails to properly see them through. One of the more compelling arcs is the true-story murder trial that Stephen tries to use as motivation for him to conquer his writer's block. Christian Slater is a wonderful actor, but he's wasted in this afterthought of a plot thread that really could have served as a parallel to the delusions that Stephen has been feeding himself over the years.
Instead, like so many other parts of the film, it is given less credence than other far inferior storylines and the end result suffers greatly. In the end, The Adderall Diaries comes off as more experimental film school fodder and less the serious look at success and its altering effects that it strives to be.
