Wednesday 29 April 2015

Film: 'While We're Young'

I thought I might enjoy this but it was not to be. My hopes were based on this being a Noah Baumbach film (writer and director) whose previous feature, 'Frances Ha', I liked. Also, it has an interesting cast - unless you're one of those who has a Ben Stiller aversion - here additionally with Naomi Watts, Adam Driver and Amanda Seyfried. In the event, after the first few scenes its slightly over hour-and-half became increasingly sombre in mood, resulting in the film seeming longer.

It did start quite promisingly with Stiller and Watts as a middle-aged childless couple, whose non-parental status is a recurring motif throughout. There's a certain staleness which has invaded their lives, but when they meet another couple twenty years or so younger than he is, with zest and enthusiasm for doing what they want, it infects their mood, waking them up as to how they ought to be living their lives to the full. The younger man (Adam Driver), stetson be-hatted, is trying to make a documentary of a certain encounter he's had and gets Stiller interested as he is also laboriously trying to compose a documentary film of an aged philosopher he knows, and getting nowhere fast. The older couple, particularly Stiller, are at first fascinated and almost smitten by the younger pair's easy-going relationship which they wish to emulate, though Naomi Watts has a more cagey attitude towards the younger pair.

There are a few moderately comic moments but they become rarer as the film progresses, until I thought, approaching the end, the whole affair became very heavy weather, with Stiller delivering a homily on truthfulness and trust, having discovered that the Driver character is not all that he was assumed to be. By this time I was stifling yawns.

Acting was okay, but for situations which could have delivered a number of bon-mots, I found the screenplay, by and large, pretty unexceptional.

A competent enough film, though not one to go out of ones way to catch. I think it deserves a...............5/10

12 comments:

  1. I have a major Ben Stiller aversion Ray. I don't know what it is, but I cannot stand anything with him in it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I knew that there were SOME like you, Craig (I'm not one of them) but reading yours and the two comments immediately below I didn't think the feeling would be as widespread as it's appearing to be. Anyway, seems like you'll be taking my advice by not going out of your way to see it, but you'll actually be running a mile to avoid it. Fair enough.

      Delete
  2. I have a minor Ben Stiller aversion. I can tolerate him if I absolutely have to, but it's no love affair. The film seems to start out with promise but goes nowhere fast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's approaching being a dud, Jon, though in the final analysis I wouldn't rate it as low as that. Rather, it falls into the well-populated category of 'Should have been better'.

      Delete
  3. For some strange reason, i absolutely detest stiller

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, another one! No further comment necessary.

      Delete
  4. Ray,
    For some strange reason, I like Ben Stiller. I was going to make this comment even before I read the comment by John Gray before mine. I shouldn't like Ben Stiller but I do. He holds a certain fascination for me the same way a car wreck holds a fascination. I suspect he is on of these short (height) ego driven "stars" who has little patience for anyone besides his own select circle of friends. But what films I have seen him in he is willing to subject himself to humiliating situations which is more than I can say for some of the more "likable" stars like Brad Pitt (whom I absolutely detest) and Paul Giamatti (scene chewer par excellence). Actors like Seth Rogan and James Franco (who always seems to have an inside joke going on while they are paid millions for their ridiculous antics) actually make me gag. I may give this film a shot just because of the height challenged Ben Stiller. At least he knows we're in on the joke with him as a Hollywood movie star. At least that's the impression he gives me. These other guys, they actually believe they are all that.
    Ron

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually if I had to choose between giving Stiller a thumbs-up or down, Ron, it would be the former, though without much gusto. He is one of those who draws ones eyes to that part of the screen, but I can just about see why some feel him irritating. I tend to see him as a latter-day Jack Lemmon in that he often plays comic roles but his good looks keep getting in the way of his clowning. What struck me also in this film was the similarity of character he tends to play to some of Woody Allen's roles - hapless and at the mercy of circumstances he can't control. Not that that's a bad thing.

      You roll out a mini-list of names whom I do actually quite like - Pitt, Giamatti and Franco - though I'm neutral on Rogan - but we can't agree on everything, which would be so dull!

      This is Stiller's film. Everything that happens is turned on what it means to him. So, as you're an admirer, I'd recommend it to you. You could well like it more than I did.

      Delete
  5. I'm another one-- I don't care much for Ben Stiller. About the only thing I've like him in has been the Night at the Museum movies. I admit, I rarely will give a movie a chance if he's in it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm being overwhelmed by the anti-Stiller wave, Sadie. I knew there was a fair number, but not on this scale. I wonder if it's known by those responsible for casting that he's a turn-off for so many. Having said that, I'll still maintain to quite liking him myself - but only 'quite'.

      Delete
  6. Well, all except for Ron, the Ben Stiller aversion seems to be unanimous. I don't hate the guy, but I have a feeling that he got where he is with the assistance of his famous parents (or, more aptly, semi-famous parents).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The anti-Stillers are clearly in a majority on this posting, Jon. I'm waiting for him to make a REALLY good film (for the first time) and to then see if his presence gets in the way of appreciating the film for what it is, which I fear may well turn out to be the case.
      I'd never heard of him until 'Something About Mary' from whence he suddenly took off to near super-stardom. I knew, and still know, very little about his background.

      Delete