BEFORE: Just 75 more films to go (74 after today) and I just might be able to complete my first Perfect Year, with a linked chain of actors that started on Jan. 1 with "Game Night", and is still going, for 225 films so far. I've never made it THIS far into a year before without breaking the chain. The plan is in place to finish, it's all mapped out, I just have to make sure nothing goes wrong. It's kind of like a heist, in that it took a lot of planning, but I still have to expect the unexpected - what if a DVD suddenly decides to not play? What if a film was on Netflix or Hulu, but disappears from that service before I get the chance to watch it? What if my hearing loss suddenly gets much worse and I have to watch everything with captions (I already do, whenever possible, but that's largely because it's easier to understand people with thick British or Scottish accents...) See, I have to be ready for anything, especially when I'm getting so close to the end of the year.
Jesus, there's a new "Star Wars" film waiting at the end of the year. What if I can't get a ticket for opening weekend? I need to arrange this with my friends as soon as tickets go on sale... If I see that film on opening day, then I'll still have time to watch four more films before Christmas, and then I'll have a week after that to plan the next heist...I mean, the program for January 2020.
Jon Bernthal carries over from "Baby Driver".
THE PLOT: Amid a time of turmoil in contemporary Chicago, four women with nothing in common, except debts left behind by their dead husbands' criminal activities, take fate into their own hands and conspire to forge a future on their own terms.
AFTER: I think my rating for today's heist film is going to end up reflecting that this film is JUST a bit harder to believe, and makes JUST a bit less sense than "Baby Driver" does, at least where heists are concerned. This film wanted SO bad to be like "Ocean's Eight", only without all the glitz and glamour, because it's got that same sort of "Sisters are doing it for themselves" vibe. But there's a big difference to me, "Ocean's Eight" had women getting together to plan a heist, and they were all experts in their chosen fields, whether that was hacking or planning or getting inside information about the event by getting a job at Vogue magazine. While I agree that women can do (just about) anything men can do, it's hard to believe that three women can gain all the knowledge and skills to pull off a caper like this in just a few weeks.
No offense intended, and I get that showing them starting from scratch means that there will be a steeper climb toward ultimate victory, but out of the three main characters (there's also a driver, but let's discuss the main three for a minute) only one seems to have the necessary determination and wherewithal to support that "Sisters can do it" theory. Regarding the other two, I'm not as impressed. One is charged with getting guns for the caper (which as we all know is way too easy in America) but she pulls the old "I'm an immigrant, no speak-a English" routine to get help, and then when she's tasked with buying a van at an auction, she neglects to mention she doesn't have a driver's license. Seriously? She thought the van would be delivered? Talk about entitled.
The other woman is tasked with figuring out the location of the safe room seen in the blueprint-like plans, and when she can't make any progress with the architects, she also falls back on the "Please help me, I'm just a girl..." routine. Has she never heard of the internet? Even then, she palms the task off on a different team member, who happens to be sleeping with a man who somehow knows every building in town (apparently he's a big fan of buildings? Is that even a thing?) so that's another poor depiction of female empowerment - the whole point is them DOING things after their husbands die, and falling back on a new boyfriend for help doesn't seem like much of an improvement.
But let me back up, because the whole thing gets set in motion when a team of criminals die mid-heist in a shootout with the Chicago police (this makes sense at the time, but fails to do so after later information is revealed) and the money stolen in that last heist apparently belonged to a political campaign, and representatives from that campaign pay a visit to the crime boss's widow, demanding the money. Her solution to this problem is to find her husband's notebook filled with incriminating evidence, and also plans and notes for the next heist. So the "logical" step she takes is to recruit the other widows and pull off the heist. Only the notes are incomplete, they don't know where the safe is, for example. Right.
This feels like a great idea for a film on paper, but then this gets torpedoed by the details, or lack thereof. If I take a step back from it, many solutions to this problem seem to be much easier than training the team from scratch in the ways of criminal activity, buying the van, guns, and stealth suits, then having the stones to go through with it all. The lead character could, for example, trade the notebook to someone else in the criminal underworld, perhaps even for the money needed to pay off the people threatening her. (To be fair, the movie acknowledges this as a possible path, but it's rejected for some reason, I guess because it would end the movie too soon.) Or you know what else is cheaper and easier? Cashing in her chips, selling all her property and belongings, and buying a one-way ticket to Patagonia or someplace equally remote, and starting her life over there. That seems less risky, too.
There are too many flashbacks, overall - specifically dealing with the death of Veronica's teenage son, and while this does become sort of important later, I'm not sure that justifies putting a flashback inside another flashback. I don't want to say any more about this for fear of giving too much away. The whole opening sequence detailing the first heist and the daily lives of the characters also did a lot of time-jumping - so really, it should be called an "opening out-of-sequence".
Another thing that doesn't make much sense to me is her knowing, at least on some level, that her husband is involved in organized crime, and then not having any plan for what happens when he dies. She had to know that was a distinct possibility, right? He didn't save any money for her in a special account, they didn't own their home but lived in a rented apartment? He didn't have a will or any plan or any investments to provide for her in the event of his own death? Geez, I guess it's true what they say about crime not paying, or at least maybe it doesn't pay very well. What it all adds up to is a story that's clunky at best, and hard to believe at worst.
Also starring Viola Davis (last seen in "Nights in Rodanthe"), Michelle Rodriguez (last heard in "Turbo"), Elizabeth Debicki (last heard in "Peter Rabbit"), Cynthia Erivo, Colin Farrell (last seen in "The Beguiled"), Brian Tyree Henry (last seen in "White Boy Rick"), Daniel Kaluuya (last seen in "Get Out"), Garret Dillahunt (last seen in "Winter's Bone"), Carrie Coon (last heard in "Avengers: Endgame"), Jacki Weaver (last seen in "The Voices"), Robert Duvall (last seen in "Lucky You"), Liam Neeson (last seen in "The Last Laugh"), Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Lukas Haas (last seen in "First Man"), Kevin J. O'Connor (Amistad), Michael Harney (last seen in "A Star Is Born"), Coburn Goss, Molly Kunz, Matt Walsh (last seen in "Movie 43"), Jon Michael Hill, James Vincent Meredith, Eric C. Lynch, Brian King, Josiah Sheffie, Adepero Oduye (last seen in "The Dinner"), Ann Mitchell, Chuck Inglish, Sir Michael Rocks, Cameron Knight.
RATING: 6 out of 10 Quinceanera dresses
No comments:
Post a Comment