Why I Saw It: When I look back on it, I'm actually a big fan of the movies Ben Stiller has directed.
Cast: Ben Stiller is the only person that matters in this. Kristen Wiig steps up whenever it is asked of her although it is a very secondary character. It is great to see her playing a human being, especially after watching Anchorman 2. Adam Scott is basically evil Ben Wyatt, complete with an awful beard. Kathryn Hahn has the beginning of a character but never gets to do enough with it to be anything. Sean Penn as the adventurous photographer, Sean O'Connell, is more symbol than character. He does get one great scene. As I said, it's all about Walter Mitty and I flat out don't buy him as a character. Here's why...
Plot: Too much. Too fast. That's the quickest way I can sum it up. I have a sweet spot for stories of guys who break out of their shells and do something with their lives (I can't imagine why I would), so this should be an easy sell. I absolutely don't buy any of it. At the beginning, Walter is painted as always spacing out and imagining a greater life. You think it is just because it's in his character. You know, he's meek and spineless. Pretty quickly the movie makes it clear that he's only the way he is because he had to be responsible for his, I guess, skill-less mother and useless sister. He's no Harold Crick. He's just been slowed down by life. There's a scene early on with him on a skateboard that sums the character up because it shows that he's unlucky not that he's unwilling to do more. The bulk of the movie is him on an adventure to find the Sean Penn's character (O'Connell). All of it is too much right place, right time for my taste and his transformation from mild-mannered negatives associate to rugged, cool guy is so fast and so complete that I couldn't buy any of it. For Christ's sake, he goes from working in an office to climbing a mountain in the Himalayas by himself in less than a month. Too much. Too fast.
Elephant in the Room: Is this really one big advertisement for Life magazine? If that's what you take away from this movie, then you're doing it wrong. Gun to my head, I couldn't even tell you if Life magazine is still around. It only exists as a launching point for the plot. I'm a little shocked that they didn't just make up a magazine. In a year with blatant corporate pandering that included The Internship, I don't see how anyone could find this egregious.
To Sum Things Up:
I wanted to like this movie a lot. I was prepared for this to be one of those "critics be damned" films that I hold dear. It shares a lot of DNA with Stranger Than Fiction which I hold sacrosanct so the fact that it can't measure up is going to make me critique is more harshly than most things I watch. This is a good enough movie. The locations look great and are nearly worth the ticket by themselves. The humor is surprisingly quieter than I've come to expect from Stiller, but in a good way. I appreciate what the movie aspires to be but I think it falls short of that goal by a lot.
Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend
No comments:
Post a Comment