Probably the most common mistake biopics make is trying to cover too much of their subjects’ lives and lacking focus and depth as a result. Lovelace smartly puts its focus squarely on the most interesting period of Deep Throat star Linda Lovelace’s life—the period where she got into the porn industry. That’s the good news about the movie. The bad news is that this is about the last smart decision it makes. Instead of being a complex look at the porn industry and how it ensnares the young people who use it to trade their reputations for an easy payday, Lovelace plays more like a piece of propaganda put together by the title character’s family. She’s portrayed 100% as an abused victim who had no control of her actions, the people who pushed her into the industry (mostly her husband, Chuck Traynor) are 100% heartless, violent monsters who ruined her life, and there’s absolutely no room for shades of grey in between. Whether or not these were really the facts of Lovelace’s life, such a black and white interpretation doesn’t make for a very interesting movie.
The good news is that the film has inexplicably attracted a really talented cast, so there’s at least some interesting acting going on as the story beats you over the head with its one note tedium. In particular, Seyfried is magnetic and likable as the lead, and even though the script does everything it can to try to make you resent her characater, she’s still got enough vulnerability in her saucer dish eyes to keep you feeling bad when bad things are happening to Linda. In addition to Seyfried, you also get to take in the talents of people like James Franco, Peter Sarsgaard, Juno Temple, Sharon Stone, and too many others to name, as well. Honestly, how did this movie attract so many great actors? Probably the highlight of the supporting cast is Robert Patrick, who plays Lovelace’s dad and gets a scene that gives him a great chance to showcase his dramatic chops. It’s only one scene, but he knocks it out of the park.
There are other things you could get into when talking about Lovelace. Like how it spends so much time demonizing the porn industry, but doesn’t waste any chance to strip off Seyfried’s clothing and linger over her body. Or how it seems to be much more concerned with layering a distracting 70s-style aesthetic over everything than fleshing out its lead character. But, honestly, the path this story takes is so predictable and the way the script builds to that endpoint is so empty and repetitive that it doesn’t feel necessary to dissect the filmmaking here in any way whatsoever. If you’re unusually invested in Lovelace’s late-in-life career as an anti-porn crusader for some reason, or if you’re really hard up to see Seyfried topless (which is more understandable), then this might be the movie for you. If not, chances are you’re just going to find it to be a bore.
