A year ago, when "Me and Orson Welles" made its debut at the Toronto International Film Festival, it was one of the most anticipated new films of the season and a leading candidate on most distributors' acquisition lists. Directed by Richard Linklater, it offered a striking vision of Orson Welles as a brash 22-year-old wunderkind mounting his legendary theatrical production of Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" -- four years before his "Citizen Kane" transformed moviemaking.

Offering a view of Welles' escapades through the eyes of a theater-crazed teenager, the movie seemed to have something for everyone, from a great performance by Christian McKay as Welles, a lively portrait of an oversize artist as a young enfant terrible and last, but certainly not least, the presence of a red-hot young actor, Zac Efron, star of "High School Musical," in the role of Welles' starstruck protege. [ read more ]

Although he's adequate, Efron never feels like a proper fit for Richard. The handsome thesp is too self-possessed and sure of himself for a teenage interloper in the big time; he lacks uncertainty and self-doubt.

The movie hits its stride as the Richard-Sonja romance heats up and Welles buckles down to business. Efron ("Hairspray," "High School Musical") holds his own against Welles/McKay, which is no easy task. He seems a bit mature for a high school student though. He's more a college sophomore.

Efron's a perfectly charming leading man, even if he looks disconcertingly handsome; another actor may have been better, but you can't help but shake the feeling that Efron was cast not solely for his in the role in the film, but also for his role in the pre-production balance sheet.

One of the problems is Zac Efron, the Disney Channel heartthrob who plays the titular "Me" -- Richard, an easygoing, good-looking teenager who gets his break of a lifetime after telling Welles what he wanted to hear. If you have kids, you know Efron from High School Musical and its sequel; if you don't, you may remember him from Hairspray. He is built for those movies, where he can sing, dance, ham it up, and hold the screen by himself in his big scenes. In a film like Me & Orson Welles, he's a liability. He's never truly in a scene with someone; he doesn't really connect or interact. If he delivers a line in close-up, you can virtually hear Linklater saying "action" and then "cut." The conceit of Me & Orson Welles is that we observe Welles and his theatrical circus through Richard's eyes, but Efron renders that perspective dull and sterile. He's no fun to watch; his journey of discovery is boring.

He's also part of the reason the film never develops any real comic momentum. There's no gleam in Efron's eye, and he can't sell the comedy. Lines that should have been killer (Love interest to Richard: "What do you have to offer?" Response: "Wealth, travel, fame. I can take you to movies that have all that.") land with a thud. He's not a good foil for the flamboyant Welles, either, because he doesn't seem to absorb anything. He just stands there. [ read more ]