Zac Efron’s done an excellent job of erasing his squeaky-clean Disney Channel image in recent years. If his fratboy roles in “Neighbors” and its sequel commenced the process, then his turns as a paint-huffing pyromaniac in Harmony Korine’s “The Beach Bum” and serial killer, Ted Bundy, in “Extremely Wicked, Shocking Evil And Vile” completed it. Efron nonetheless retains his best asset in both of those roles: his distinctive good looks. Sure, Bundy was a handsome chameleon; that’s part of his terrifying charm. And Flicker’s Riff Raff beard was transformative in Korine’s picture, but it’s also an oddly endearing accouterment. So, since neither of those movies strips the actor of his Adonis status, the question remains—does Efron have anything else beyond his boyish good looks to convince moviegoers that he’s now a serious actor? If it weren’t for the limitations of its premise, Anthony Hayes‘ “Gold” would provide a conclusive answer because Efron gets the worst of the outback’s harsh elements in this movie.
By the end, Efron’s already-scarred and limping drifter has a face so bloody and sun-blistered he’s hardly recognizable. Then again, after the film’s opening act, he’s also left with little else to do but go through the usual survival thriller routine of, well, survive or die. In short, it’s hard to tell if Efron’s acting carries “Gold” because its narrative is so stripped-down. As a movie, things play out as an obvious parable about the greed that grips men’s hearts once civilization’s fires die out. In terms of a one-man show for Efron, however, it provides too little dramatic flair to show he has a range beyond his pretty-boy charms. The film’s scope and setting are too barren to give Efron that opportunity.
A young man (Efron) arrives at a remote desert outpost by train in a desolate near-future. He’s there to meet another man (Hayes) who agreed to drive him to a compound deep in the outback for new opportunities, i.e., hard labor. After engine trouble mid-trip, the pair make a sudden pitstop and uncover a miraculous find: a massive gold nugget buried in the outland floor. Without the proper tools to dig it out, the men reach an agreement. The driver will take the truck a couple of days’ journey to collect an excavator, while the younger man stays there the allotted 4-5 days to protect their find until he returns. As the young traveler stands guard, he contends with the harsh landscape, packs of feral dogs, and a mysterious female drifter (Susie Porter) to protect his fortune. Days pass, and as morale wanes and sanity breaks, the driver’s absence prompts suspicion: did he leave the other to die to seize the entire nugget for himself?
With supporting roles in “Cargo” and David Michôd‘s “The Rover,” Anthony Hayes is no stranger to dystopian outback cinema. Those films have larger casts, though, and in the case of “Cargo,” a zombified backdrop. Once Hayes sets up its premise, “Gold” has nothing except its titular boulder-sized nugget to spice up its man versus nature narrative. A bad call on Hayes’ part, as the little wordbuilding the film offers in its opening minutes ends up more interesting than the last half of the entire movie. Hayes gives only the barest of details about the two drifters and the world they inhabit. Efron comes from the West, and there’s nothing and no one to keep him there. Hayes got used to being alone a long time ago. A fireside chat early in the film offers some more info about this wasteland, with cities to the south and more people heading to the outback in desperation, but the details are so sparse they fail to give these men a real sense of authenticity.
This spareness of detail becomes problematic once Efron and Hayes split, and Efron has only the gold boulder and its brutally literal promise of wealth for company. Unfortunately, the rest of the story’s twists end up just as brutal and literal as the nugget’s gilded promises. Efron’s relaxed attitude toward scorpions in his camp betrays his lack of intuition about Haye’s true nature. His later aggression toward a snake that slithers by as he refills his water jug shows his already evident carelessness toward resources more precious than gold. A crashed airplane discovered over a dune foretells no escape. The disposal of a suspicious female scavenger burns Efron up with guilt. An intense dust storm blinds him from what he should value in his circumstances. All the while, the dog-eat-dog world circles around Efron’s camp, waiting with ruthless pragmatism for his fire and life to die out.
It’s not these motifs are ineffective or that Efron lacks the physicality to make his performance believable. Instead, Hayes makes the film’s themes so bludgeoningly obvious it dilutes his other aptitudes as a director. Hayes creates a stark yet beautiful post-apocalyptic world and shoots the outback well to emphasize its austere yet majestic scenery. However, there’s not enough nuance to this story for it to stand out against “The Rover” or other survival dramas of its ilk. Robert Zemeckis‘s “Cast Away” and Danny Boyle‘s “127 Hours” succeed as man against nature thrillers because the relative isolation of those characters opens up their inner world. Through their trials, audiences discover their fears, hopes, and ambition to overcome their circumstances. No such thing happens here for Efron’s drifter.
In the case of “Gold,” Hayes reduces Efron’s battle against the elements to a last-minute gag about opportunism: whoever waits on the periphery the longest gets to lay the last trap and enjoy the spoils. A tricksterish takeaway, to be sure, but also one that makes the preceding ninety minutes feel even more pointless. If there’s anything of value “Gold” has for its audience, it’s that Efron continues to take risks as an actor. The upcoming “Firestarter” probably won’t end the debate about his acting pedigree beyond his pretty face, but Efron could strike gold at some point. As for “Gold,” this film should stay buried. [C-]
“Gold” is in theaters now.
