There is no such thing as a great biopic. Don't @ me.
Two recent ones — "Vice," a mean-spirited look at former Vice President Dick Cheney, and "On the Basis of Sex," a reverential portrait of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — remind us that movies often attempt biographies, especially at year's end when there are awards to be had, but rarely do them well.
Issue numero uno is that it's tough to cover an accomplished person's life in two or three hours, unless that person does the filmmaker a solid by dying young. ("Without Limits" gracefully covers runner Steve Prefontaine's whole life, but he died at 24.)
My own story probably could be biopic-ed in the length of a Pixar short, but the lives of Cheney, Ginsburg, Mahatma Gandhi, Malcolm X and Abraham Lincoln are too jam-packed for a feature-length film. What they need is the space a biographer can give them. Just ask Robert Caro, whose 3,500-page, four-volume bio of Lyndon Johnson still hasn't reached his second presidential term. Books also are better than movies at conveying the inner lives of people and at tracing the passage of time — both essentials in telling a life story.
That's why it's possible to emerge from a biopic feeling like you understand its subject less than you did when you went in. Exhibit A: biopics that win Oscars for their "importance" but quickly vanish from the memories of people who care about the movies.
Attempting to cram in an entire life results in "Gandhi" or "Ray," honorably boring films that proceed from point A to point B to point C so dutifully that they lose the point along the way. Movies like those cover the key bases, yes, but they're bloodless and dull because they record events without attempting to make sense of them. And, since they require an actor to age over the course of many decades, these biopics also often feature a lot of indefensible makeup. (Musical biopics such as "Ray" present an additional problem, in that they're almost designed to make us wish we were watching the real performer do their stuff, instead of a knockoff.)
"Vice" is off-puttingly bilious and messy but at least it never bores us. Cherry-picking the lowlights of the veteran politician's life, "Vice" smartly takes a deep dive into a defining event, the 9/11 attacks, arguing that was when Cheney fulfilled his secret dream of hijacking the presidency. That happens early in the movie, which then dips back and forth to make its case that Cheney (Christian Bale, who used his Golden Globe acceptance speech last Sunday to show he'd already dropped the 40 pounds he gained for the role) duped George W. Bush into being a figurehead for a de facto Cheney presidency.
Maybe its focus is so tight that "Vice" doesn't count as a biopic. That term tends to be applied to birth-to-death movies, but writer/director Adam McKay's movie belongs to the best category of biopics, those that choose a specific event in a person's life to illustrate the whole.