BEFORE: Four days in to the New Year, and it's time for the first Birthday SHOUT-out of 2025, to Michelle Mylett, born 1/4/90. She's in a couple films on my list, but I'm not using her as a link because the other film is a Christmas film.
Matt Dillon carries over from "Proxima". I worked at a screening of this film back in March of 2024, as part of that Tuesday night film appreciation class, but the film has an official release date of 2022, so it's possible that any theatrical release was delayed due to the pandemic, or problems finding a distributor, who can tell?
THE PLOT: An economics professor dreams of buying a house above his pay grade.
AFTER: Well, now I know what the word "adjunct" means, as in "adjunct professor", since the main characters here and also in "The Holdovers" have that as their job. It's a part-time faculty member, hired on a contract basis, they are staff but not "staff staff", meaning they don't have to go to staff meetings. Some may have to work for several colleges in order to make ends meet. "Adjunct" itself means a thing added to something else in a supplementary way, not something that is an essential part. OK, good to know - and if your main character is an adjunct professor, as in non-tenured, well your screenplay then practically writes itself, doesn't it? All the drama you need is right there in that word, this is someone who's a teacher but also a temp, so they're starting the movie on some thin ice with their institution, once things start to go horribly wrong (as they always do) you can kind of guess that this is someone who's going to get into trouble and also be held responsible. Surely a meeting with the dean and, at the very least, a stern rebuke is in this character's future.
Yes, there's clearly a formula being used here - this is someone who's had some tough times, been around the block a few times, but at some point things started not going his way, and continued like that for a very long time. And once you're in a rut like that, you can't really just EXIST your way out of it (trust me on this point), you have to take bold action, like an interview for a new job or perhaps just quit, cash in your retirement plans and go find a beach to live next to while you take a quick course in bartending. Because every place there's a beach, people want to have drinks, right? And it's cheaper to open a bar than a restaurant, right? Or maybe just leave everything behind, find a job in Montana and live there, at least there will be nice scenery.
But Phil's pipe dream is to own a home, to have four walls and a roof and maybe a lawn that he can call his, because that's the American dream. Later in the film we're going to find out what exactly went wrong in Phil's life, why he's bitter and how he ended up where he is, but none of that keeps him from dreaming about a house. So he goes to real estate events hosted by his friend (?) Dell, however exactly everything is out of his price range, because it turns out that if you make $50K a year, you can't really afford a house that costs $5 million, that's just math. And it's not that you'll be in debt for the rest of your life, it's that you won't even qualify for the mortgage, so it's never going to happen. You would think that an economics professor would understand this.
Dell gives Phil the best advice about real estate, buy a small condo you can afford, stop wasting your money on apartment rent, and start building up some equity. Maybe in 10 or 11 years if the housing market cooperates, you can sell that condo for four or five times your mortgage, then you can use that money for a starter home. Sure, by the time you get the house you want, you may be ready for a retirement community, but at least you can say you were a homeowner for a period of time. And you can't ensure there won't be a recession or a depression in there somewhere, when the bubble bursts you might have to stay in one place for a while until the market gets better. Nothing is guaranteed, after all.
But Phil finds a unique short-cut, because at least on some level, he's able to spot a good deal. He sees a classified ad for a "live-in", which means he can buy a $5 million house for $240,000 but he has to live there in an upstairs apartment until the owner dies, at which point he can take sole possession of the property. It sounds too good to be true, which probably means that it is. But he relies on his real-estate guy to draw up a contract, and then cashes in all his accounts to buy the property. Huge NITPICK point here, because Phil signs the deal without ever meeting the seller face-to-face, without ever seeing the interior of the property or conducting only a cursory inspection. You'd think that anyone with a brain who's about to hand over such a large amount or money would do a little more research, and again, he's supposed to be smart about economics. When we bought our house we had the place inspected by a professional, who gave us a "punch list" of things that might need to be repaired or upgraded, and we had to allow the buyer of our condo the same ability to inspect the property and figure out that out too. Caveat emptor.
Of course, this creates the narrative tension and drama here, who is this mysterious owner, what's her deal and why would she sell her property to a stranger without ever meeting him? Why would Phil move all his stuff over in a van to that upstairs apartment without being 100% sure of what he was getting into? OK, so you can never be 100% sure of anything, but come on, if you're going to share space with someone, wouldn't you be the least bit curious? Astrid turns out to be a complete character, she's been around and had a few husbands, she might have dementia or maybe she's just old, but exactly how old and how long will it be before Phil gets the house? There are people hanging around the house who she calls her "kids", but are they really her children, because one claims to be a plumber and charges Phil cash to fix his shower. So is this all some kind of scam to get the rest of his money?
Meanwhile, Phil enters into a relationship with one of his grad students, which probably isn't a good idea since he's only an adjunct professor, and it's almost certainly against the rules. And as things seem to get crazier with this house, after he invested all of his money into it, Phil's lectures about the American economic system are starting to reflect his frustration and his descent into madness. Instead of discovering the joys of home ownership at last, Phil learns about the cost of home repairs, many of which are caused by his own clumsiness after he can't resist breaking into the main part of the house to investigate it. Again, you'd think there would have been an appropriate time for him to see the house BEFORE he maybe sort of bought it, some time in the future.
I'm guessing there's not a real estate professional in the world who would say that contract is a good idea, or even legit. If Astrid has a valid will and leaves the house to any children or family members, then it might be up to a judge who gets the house - sure, Phil's got proof that he paid a certain dollar amount for the property, so Astrid's heirs might need to pay him some money as a buyout, and the film eventually does get around to addressing this, but still I'm not sure that the narrative here has any semblance of reality - not that it needs to. But even though the chemistry between the characters is there, points off for the narrative inconsistencies and for injuries sustained by both leads every time the movie needs a laugh.
Also starring Peter Dinklage (last seen in "Unfrosted"), Shirley MacLaine (last seen in "Mike Wallace Is Here"), Kimberly Quinn (last seen in "The Starling"), Danny Pudi (last seen in "Somebody I Used to Know"), Danny Glover (last seen in "Shooter"), Michelle Mylett, Peter Kelamis (last seen in "Killing Gunther"), Rebecca Olson (ditto), Garry Chalk (last seen in "Overboard" (2018)), Kimberley Shoniker, Raresh DiMofte, Rami Kahlon, Davin Tong, Peter New (last seen in "Black Christmas"), Donald Heng, Brendan Riggs, C. Ernst Harth (last seen in 'Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed"), Corina Akeson, Jennifer-Juniper Angeli, Masa Delara, Frank Warburton Bailey III, Clayton James Booi, Thaddeus Monckton
RATING: 6 out of 10 ham sandwiches from a vending machine
No comments:
Post a Comment