Skip to main content

You call this a nice weekend? This is sad.

Last Vegas
(2013)

(SPOILERS) I’m all in favour of more movies featuring performers of pensionable age in leading roles, just as long as they aren’t lousy. Last Vegas is of such adverse quality, it makes Stand Up Guys seem like an unalloyed classic in comparison. It’s fairly self-evident that some not-so bright exec (or budding writer) decided to pitch The Hangover for old guys, right down to the Vegas location. Many will debate the merits of Todd Phillips’ film (I liked it), but this crumbly, soiled, too-damn-spineless-to-risk-offending-its-intended-audience (just a little bit risqué, that will be sufficient) is utterly bereft. And yet its gambit worked; four over-the-hill stars – all Oscar winners to boot (who haven’t worked together before) – up to not such hijinks equals a box office hit.


There’s nothing in the set up that should need explaining, it writes itself, but I’ll go ahead anyway; Billy (Douglas), suddenly conscious of his own mortality, decides to tie the knot with a woman nearly 40 years his junior and invites his childhood friends (although there are 14 years between the youngest and oldest, and Freeman the oldest has weathered better than at least two of his juniors) to Vegas for the wedding. Archie (Freeman; his character had a stroke a while back and his son smothers him) and Sam (Kline; his marriage has lost its sparkle) decide to throw him a bachelor party and manage to drag misery-guts Paddy (De Niro; his wife died recently and he doesn’t forgive Billy for missing the funeral) along too. When they get there lots of really funny stuff with old coots doing youngster stuff ensues, while both Billy and Paddy find their heads turned by an age-appropriate lounge singer (Steenburgen).


We knew De Niro no longer had any shame, and we knew Freeman would lend “instant gravitas” vocals to any old shit, so their presence here isn’t such a surprise (Freeman’s been making movies about being nearly dead for the best part of a decade now, after all). But Douglas is running on fumes here like never before, even given all those so-so thrillers he made in the decade from the mid-‘90s (a poor man’s Harrison Ford, Ford inherited that mantle subsequently). He’s an actor who should never try to coast on charm, because he comes across as inveterately smug if his characters have no edge. On occasion he’s played off that marvellously (The War of the Roses, Romancing the Stone) but he’s stranded here. De Niro is playing an irascible sod, and even gets to stumble through his tired Mob routine, so it’s almost as if he didn’t even have to get out of bed in the morning and show up on set; they came to him.


Only Kline, the youngest of the quartet, escapes with any dignity intact. That’s because he’s actually energetic and a naturally sharp comedian, even when the script is doing its best to sink him. Sam’s quite extraordinarily sloppy set up has wife Miriam (Joanna Gleeson) give him a free pass to get his end away in order to perk up his life and their relationship. To this end she presents him with a condom and some Viagra (it’s just a blessed relief that the mortifying stiffy sequence with Pacino in Stand Up Guys doesn’t recur here). Cluelessly, we’re supposed to congratulate Sam for not going through with the deed with some young totty because he realises how much he loves his wife.


So Kline’s amiable, even if Sam has to learn that trannies are people too. None of these guys have much chemistry, but at least Kline and Freeman have a sufficiently laid back presence to let the embarrassments and rote plotting wash over them. This includes copious bodily function and age jokes, and old people with potty mouths (but not too potty, this is a 12/PG13). De Niro is often quite painful to watch, and you occasionally get the impression that Douglas is not quite sure why he agreed to star. Freeman cannot do drunk acting (they drink lots of red bull and vodka, the crazy hooligans; they’ll be tasting that the entirety of the next day).


There’s a hugely depressing scene where the guys judge a bikini contest at a pool party, set to hugely depressing bangin’ tunes that no self-respecting sexagenarian would suffer gladly. It climaxes in the MC Stefan Gordy waving his crotch in De Niro’s face. Which, frankly, De Niro has coming if he’s so indiscriminate. As his character says at one point, “You call this a nice weekend? This is sad”. You got it, Bobby.


Mercifully, Steenburgen is a consistent sunny bright spot in this sea of frothing decay. Somehow, whenever Diana is on screen, the picture shifts into sincerity and warmth, which quickly disperses in the next scene. Someone should give her a proper autumn romance movie (preferably not opposite yukking Douglas or somnambulant De Niro, though).


The shots are called by Jon Turteltaub with consummate indifference. Somehow he became one of Bruckheimer’s main guys for a while (National Treasures) despite having an abundant lack of flair. The worst charge I can level at him here, aside from maintaining a career path of abject mediocrity, is that he endorsed the horrific soundtrack, with horribly chipper sub-80s jazz noodling from Mark Mothersbaugh and aforementioned foghorn dance anthems.


The saddest aspect of all this is that it wouldn't be that difficult to make an ageing ensemble picture – even with such a derivative premise – halfway decent. Wheel in some desiccated stars who actually spark off each other (De Vito came to mind, if you’ve got Douglas already), a writer who had absolutely no involvement with Fred Claus, and a director who cares just a jot, and they might have had something. And avoid the crap celeb cameo (De Niro’s Righteous Kill chum Fiddy Cent). Instead this is a charmless, bad taste mess. Even the attempts at reflection – when Steenburgen isn’t there – are stiff and contrived. Last Vegas made me feel very old.



Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism