Skip to main content

Going in Style tries to Prove that Old People Are Funny


          Going in Style is one of the most unexpected remakes in recent memory. The original 1979 comedy starring George Burns, Art Carney, and Lee Strasberg, has been forgotten by most except evidently for Zach Braff (yeah, the guy from Scrubs) who directed this modern version. But is a story about three old men undertaking a heist worthy of two movies?
          Senior citizen Joe (Michael Caine) witnesses a robbery during an unpleasant bank appointment about his mortgage. Later when the company he used to work for is bought out, and the restructuring process cancels his pension, he recruits his friends and fellow victims Willie (Morgan Freeman) and Albert (Alan Arkin) to plan a bank robbery of their own and get back the money they rightfully deserve.
          Having never seen the original I can’t comment on how this new movie compares, but this plot is pretty paper thin. It’s exactly what you’d expect in both direction and tone. There are decent character moments, such as when we see Joe or Willie bond with their grandchildren, and a couple moments that are played seriously towards the end, but generally the story’s path always leads back to the central joke of “three old guys committing a robbery”. Most of the comedy is in service of that and it doesn’t take long for it to get tiring. There are only a small handful of laughs in this film, and that’s because the novelty of old men trying to steal from a grocery store, trying weed for the first time, or just all round moving slowly isn’t as funny as the filmmakers think. A movie can’t get by an old people jokes anymore. On the contrary, the excess focus on age can on be a little depressing at times. I don’t like to hear greats like Caine, Freeman, and Arkin predicting when they’re going to die.The writing is not that smart, and the direction isn’t in anyway comically unique. And the humour also plays really safe, remaining largely predictable and inoffensive. There are exceptions of course, the occasional delivery from one of the leads, and at least one great physical joke. The funniest material comes from Christopher Lloyd who plays one of their lodge friends who has severe dementia, but even those jokes are mostly one-note. Lloyd just happens to be able to make them entertaining. 
          Really there are only three things this movie has going for it and they are Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and Alan Arkin. They’re all great legends of actors and though comedy is none of their biggest strengths (except perhaps for Arkin), they’re good enough and their chemistry is strong enough that they hold your attention. There’s a very believable friendship between them and that’s the films’ backbone. None of their characters are that well defined, apart from the roles these three usually play of late. Caine is disgruntled but passionate, Arkin is sarcastic and cynical, and Freeman is essentially the same guy as in The Bucket List and Last Vegas (this is also his sixth time in a film alongside Caine). But you sympathize with these guys for the horrible system that’s screwing them over. And for that there is some investment in the success of their heist. Overall they are enjoyable, and seeing as they’re on screen almost the whole movie, they distract from the major problems that would’ve sunk this film had it been cast with lesser actors. The supporting cast do a good job too for what it’s worth. From John Ortiz as their guide to mass theft, to Ann-Margret (who looks just like she did twenty years ago) as Alberts’ love interest; Joey King as Joe’s granddaughter, Peter Serafinowicz as her drug selling father, and a surprising Matt Dillon as an FBI agent.
          Going in Style is technically not a good movie. It has way too little substance and lacklustre comedy that relies far too much on the same kind of jokes. But it is harmless and cute, and is in no way as insulting as other movies currently in theatres. Caine, Freeman, and Arkin carry the lesser material and make for a more enjoyable time than this kind of movie deserves. To be honest, it’s a perfectly good movie to take your parents or grandparents to. They might get some enjoyment out of this set-up and the light comedy, as well as the actors. It’s definitely not worth the full price of admission, but if you were interested by the trailer, it delivers more or less exactly on that. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day