"The Old Man" and "The Gray Man"

I wouldn't normally pair reviews for a feature film and an ongoing series together, but with these titles, I couldn't resist.  "The Old Man" is an FX spy show starring Jeff Bridges and John Lithgow, who haven't been in anything together before, and get to play off each other as old friends and old spies in some satisfying ways.  Bridges plays Dan Chase, a former CIA operative who has managed to exist off the grid for a few decades, but forces from the past return, and he goes on the run.  Eventually he picks up a traveling companion, a woman named Zoe (Amy Brenneman).  Chase is also being hunted by a hitman named Julian Carson (Gbenga Akinnagbe), an old colleague, who is now high up in the FBI, Harold Harper (Lithgow), and Harper's protege Angela Adams (Alia Shawkat).

"The Old Man" is an unusual series in that it really pushes the characters and their relationships to the forefront, and derives most of the story's twists and turns from those relationships, rather than the usual intrigues of spycraft.  In that sense it feels rather old fashioned, with many of the key scenes coming down to fiery confrontations and heated conversations.  There's still plenty of action in the show, and it's beautifully staged - helping us all pretend that the aging Jeff Bridges is capable of being a world class badass.  However, what it's especially good at is upending the status quo from episode to episode, and constantly making the viewer question their own assumptions about who these characters are.  Zoe, for instance, starts out as something of an unfortunate bystander, and a few episodes later her relationship to Chase has changed completely, and she's revealed herself to be capable of taking control of the situation in a way that's surprising and refreshing.

At the same time, the many shocking revelations and paradigm shifts don't all work, and I expect that those looking for a more traditional kind of spy story might become frustrated by the amount of melodrama.  "The Old Man" wouldn't be as enjoyable if it weren't for the stellar cast helping to smooth over some of the more ridiculous dialogue.  Alia Shawkat feigning indignation during a particularly wild conversation between Adams and Harper struck me as a bridge too far, and it wasn't the last time that happened.  The weakest segments of the show involve flashbacks to a younger Chase (Kenneth Mitchell) during the Soviet-Afghan War, which are too many and too tedious.  Still, when it's Bridges or Lithgow  onscreen, it's so good to see them have the opportunity to play interesting characters.  I had no trouble finishing the seven episode season, which infuriatingly ends on a big cliffhanger.

"The Gray Man," one of Netflix's more pricey action spectacles, is much slicker, more disposable entertainment.  The Russo brothers direct and Ryan Gosling stars as Sierra Six, a felon recruited to be a secret CIA assassin.  He has a target put on his back when he acquires a particular asset from a fellow assassin that's full of incriminating CIA secrets.  His panicking supervisors send a sadistic killjoy contractor named Lloyd Hansen (Chris Evans) after him, target his original recruiter Fitzroy (Billy Bob Thornton), and even kidnap Fitzroy's young niece Claire (Julia Butters) to get him to cooperate.  Six's only ally is CIA agent Dani Miranda (Ana De Armas), who had the bad luck of partnering with him on the mission where he acquired the asset, putting her in danger too.  Alfre Woodard, Jessica Henwick, Rege Jean Page, Dhanoush, and Wagner Moura are also involved as various operatives and handlers.

Ryan Gosling is excellent as an action star, and the Russos essentially turn him into a world-weary Bruce Willis figure here, having him deliver wry one-liners between the action set-pieces, and progressively get more and more beat-up as the movie goes on.  When he gets punched, or stabbed, or lands badly, you wince, and it happens a lot.  The villain is Chris Evans in full dirtbag mode as evil psycho, Lloyd.  He's fun to watch and easy to root against, but never gets to let loose as much as you can tell he wants to.  "The Gray Man," in spite of the relentless amount of destruction, is a very PG-13 action film.  A significant amount of time is spent trying to endear us to Claire, an annoying twelve-year-old who Six gets attached to, and ends up being the major MacGuffin in the movie, because the plot here is totally beside the point.              

    

Compared to other Netflix action movies like "Red Notice" and "6 Underground," "The Gray Man"  isn't bad at all.  However, the film is so generic that it seems an awful shame to have wasted the talents of the Russos, Gosling, Evans, De Armas, and all the rest on it.  The high price tag means that the action is suitably grand scale, and I'm sure plenty of viewers will have a good time with it, but I was hoping for more.       

---

My Favorite Henri-Georges Clouzot Film

It's easy to describe Henri-Georges Clouzot as the French Alfred Hitchcock.  Clouzot was most famous for his thrillers, and once even beat Hitchcock to adapting material he was interested in.  This  resulted in the classic "Diabolique," which would go on to inspire "Psycho."  However, Clouzot was equally proficient in other genres, directing the historical romance "Manon," the comedy "Miquette," and the astonishing documentary, "The Mystery of Picasso," which I was very tempted to write this entry about.  And unlike Hitch, Clouzot wrote or co-wrote most of his films.

Still, when I think of Clouzot, I inevitably always come back to "The Wages of Fear," a taut action thriller from the '50s that would be remade in the '70s by William Friedkin as "Sorcerer."  It has some of the greatest suspense sequences ever filmed, following a group of men in South America who have been hired to transport nitroglycerin through rough country on a pair of trucks.  Too much jostling could set off the unstable explosives, killing whoever is close by, so every roadblock becomes a life-or-death situation - boulders in the road, rotting bridges over plunging precipices, oil spills, sharp turns, and worse.  

The film runs over 150 minutes, and nearly the first hour is spent setting up the four men hired to do the job,  and the enormity of the risk they are taking.  Once the actual journey begins, however, their chatter falls away, the spectacular sound design takes over, and the tension becomes unrelenting.  Little by little the danger grows and escalates.  The trucks are sometimes forced to inch their way forward, up a mountain, trying to avoid almost certain disaster.  Every narrow escape just makes the men more paranoid.  The smallest setbacks are magnified to feel insurmountable, and basic car trouble has never seemed more harrowing.  During my first viewing, I hardly noticed the length of the film because I was so absorbed by the suspense.           

I didn't appreciate the themes of "The Wages of Fear" until after multiple viewings.  Clouzot famously considered the film to be about courage.  The four men engaged for the journey have been thrown together by fate, all European expats stuck in a dead-end town, trying to make enough money to escape.  Initially, the job is seen as a windfall, as opportunities are few and far between.   Inevitably, however, the tension becomes too much and they start to lose their nerve.   The filmmaking is bleak and impartial, as the men come to realize that no matter how they struggle, their fates will be decided by luck more than skill.  Where they come from and who they are don't matter in the face of danger.   Our lead, played by Yves Montand, is shown to be an unpleasant brute, but his worst actions are committed out of fear and panic rather than malice or greed.  Acts of bravery seem to be born of instinctual self preservation.  It's a remarkably cynical outlook, one I can't imagine would play well to broader audiences today.  

Then there are the political messages.  For ages, the film could only be accessed in the United States in heavily edited form.  The oil company that hires the desperate men is an American outfit, and clearly an exploitative, unethical one.  They treat the men as expendable, forgoing safer delivery options so that the nitroglycerin can be transported more quickly.  This was deemed too political, and potentially anti-American, so roughly thirty-five minutes of early scenes were deleted from the U.S. version.  Ironically, this is the least successful part of the film, and I suspect that the shorter version plays better because it gets us into the thick of the action faster.

The angry, cynical  tone of the film reflects a filmmaker who was often described as angry and short-tempered on set, with a penchant for nihilistic, misanthropic material.  He was criticized in his time for being pessimistic and morbid, but Clouzot was passionate about his work.   He would go on to further success but his popularity was fairly short-lived and he didn't direct many more films after "Wages of Fear" and "Diabolique."  His most prolific period ended with the death of his wife, Vera, who appeared in three of his films, including "Wages of Fear."  The lone female character, Montand's girlfriend, was created for her by Clouzot.    

What I've Seen - Henri-Georges Clouzot

The Murderer Lives at Number 21 (1942)
Le Corbeau (1943)
Quai des Orfèvres (1947)
Manon (1949)
The Wages of Fear (1953)
Les Diaboliques (1955)
The Mystery of Picasso (1956)
Les Espions (1957)
La Vérité (1960)

---

"Stranger Things," Year Four (With Spoilers)

Spoilers for the full series ahead.

                                       

As much as I might complain about weaker plotting or too many characters getting too little time, the Duffers have consistently figured out how to keep "Stranger Things" very engaging and very exciting to watch.  The basic mechanics of scrappy kids fighting monsters has always been rock solid, and there were multiple moments during this year where I got to cheer for the heroes and hiss at the villains in a way that I genuinely haven't in ages.  Not everything pays off, but when something does, it's usually immensely satisfying.  The big Vecna reveal with Nancy was great.  Eleven confronting Bremmer and blowing up the helicopter was great.  Hopper going after demodogs with a sword, and Murray with a flamethrower were great.  Everybody got a little moment to shine, even if it was something as simple as Erica getting to clobber a jock, or Robin talking her way into the sanitarium.  I understand the frustration with certain plotlines getting dragged out, but when those things finally pay off in Season Five, I expect it'll be worth the wait too.

Jamie Campbell Bower is one of the season's MVPs, because he was apparently in that full body Vecna suit during many important scenes.  His introduction as 001/Henry feels a little overdue, and some of the series mythology has clearly been retconned to accommodate him.  However, a Freddy Krueger style villain operating on the same level as Eleven is such a nice change of pace from the demogorgons and mindflayers and assorted moist blobs.  Vecna's confrontation scene with Max was the clear highlight of the year.  I've always appreciated "Stranger Things" for embracing the kind of squishy, tactile, Cronenbergian horror that I grew up on, and not relying so much on CGI.  When the show does use CGI, however, it's perfect.  It took me a while to catch on that the flashbacks to the original Hawkins lab featured a de-aged Millie Bobby Brown, because it's been so long since the first season.  It absolutely blows everything I've seen from the latest Marvel and "Star Wars" shows out of the water, though it's probably not fair to be comparing very different kinds of shows.  

There's been some chatter that the oversized cast should have been pruned down this year, but the Duffers have made it clear that "Stranger Things" is not "Game of Thrones" and we should not be holding our breaths for a high body count.  It's a little disturbing that the fandoms for these franchises have an element that's been so bloodthirsty.  I like all of these characters enough that I don't want to see anybody die.  I like that the Duffers have staunchly refused to give up on the John Hughes elements of the show, and there were significant chunks of the screen time devoted to Robin pining after Vickie (Amybeth McNulty), Steve and Nancy getting closer, and setting up how Eddie and Chrissy (Grace Van Dien) were developing a connection.  And then you have Will failing to confess to Mike and being supported by Jonathan.  And Dustin and Eddie becoming best bros, and Dustin having to break the news to Eddie's uncle.  Max became a lot of people's favorite character this year, because there were real stakes to her story, and "Dear Billy" was this long, intense build-up to her presumed demise - that I hope we all realized that we didn't want to see happen.  

Most of my real complaints about this season come down to the Duffers being given too much leeway and refusing to kill some of their darlings.  The 150 minute finale really was too much of everything, and I can't help wondering if they re-edited the climax to add Kate Bush in response to "Running Up That Hill" going viral.  The downbeat epilogue really should have been a separate episode, given how different the pacing was, and frankly this season could have easily been twelve or thirteen episodes instead of nine.  Several characters and storylines could have used more closure, such as Eleven's bullies, the other basketball guys, Dr. Owen, the military, and Enzo (Tom Wlaschiha).  At least there was proper setup for the fifth season, and we've got plenty of cliffhangers to chew over until it gets here.  I really hope it doesn't take another three years, but if that's what the Duffers need to make a good season of "Stranger Things," I say let them have it.

---

"Stranger Things," Year Four (Without Spoilers)

It's been three years since the third season of "Stranger Things," and the Duffer Brothers and their collaborators have made good use of the time.  In a year where we've seen such a crush of prestige streaming series, and Disney+ has been pushing high priced Marvel and "Star Wars" properties, "Stranger Things" is far and away the most impressive series on any platform.  The production rivals anything currently playing in theaters, and totally outclasses any imitator on streaming.  It feels like this is one of the only pieces of media of its kind - a true longform series told with all the resources of blockbuster filmmaking.

There have been debates on the relative merits of the last few seasons, but this year of "Stranger Things" feels like a significant step up.  All the kids except Erica are now in high school.  The adults are almost totally absent - Joyce and Murray spend the whole season traveling to Russia to rescue Hopper from a Soviet prison camp, while the kids are split up between Hawkins and California.  Satanic panic finally reaches Hawkins, as a series of murders puts the high school DnD group, the Hellfire Club, in the crosshairs, with its leader Eddie Munson (Joseph Quinn) as the prime suspect.  The actual culprit is a new villain from the Upside Down that the kids dub Vecna.  Preying on troubled kids, Vecna can psychically murder his victims and seems unstoppable.    

This season's biggest stumbling block is that there are too many characters.  Joyce, Hopper, and Murray are joined by "Game of Thrones" alum Tom Wlaschiha for a very self-contained storyline that is honestly fine as typical action movie fodder.  It's the least impressive part of this season, but it's better material than what these characters have usually had to work with.  The California crew consist of the Byers brothers, Jonathan's new stoner pizza delivery pal Argyle (Eduardo Franco), a visiting Mike, and Eleven - who is quickly whisked away to a secret lab by Sam Owens (Paul Reiser) to try and get her powers back.  The boys get some hijinks and eventually a road trip, but not much else.  The show has been dancing around Will possibly being gay, and Jonathan's relationship troubles with Nancy for two seasons now, probably because it doesn't know what else to do with them. 

Back in Hawkins, the older teenagers - Nancy, Steve, and Robin - mostly have romance on their minds as they help the others delve into the secrets of Vecna and local maniac Victor Creel (Robert Englund).  Eleven, Lucas, and Max are the major characters who become the focus of the season, and actually get full character arcs.  Lucas has joined the basketball team, under the leadership of bullying jock Jason Carver (Mason Dye), and is being pressured to turn his back on his nerdier friends.  Max is still struggling with the aftermath of Season Three spoilers, and becomes one of Vecna's targets.  And then there's Eleven, who gets a chance to confront parts of her past as she tries to reboot herself.  Dustin and Eddie are also pretty prominent, eventually getting a subplot during the big finale all to themselves.

All the actors are as good as they've ever been, but the villains this year are especially vital, creating palpable threats to everybody in the show.  The horror elements in "Stranger Things" have always been great, and now they Duffers are tapping into the slasher side of the genre, specifically the gruesome Freddy Krueger energy that so many '80s horror flicks had.  The nightmare imagery of the Upside Down is more expensive looking, and more varied, giving us new locations and new things to be scared of.  The effects crew really outdid themselves, and as a result "Stranger Things" has never been more exciting or fun to watch as pure spectacle.   As teen drama - well, your mileage will likely vary.  The creators get away with a lot of messy and uneven writing this year, because it's clearly setting up for Season Five, which will reportedly be the last.  

It's clear that the Duffers and Shawn Levy are starting to get too indulgent.  While I generally support variable episode lengths, there was no reason that the finale had to be two and a half hours long, riddled with unnecessary slo-mo shots, and so haphazardly edited.  Splitting the season up into two volumes was smart because it generated a lot more chatter and momentum for the second half, but I think the audience would have been much happier if those two episodes were either much shorter, or just reworked into four episodes.    

More on specific story issues and Vecna next time, with spoilers… 

----

Rank 'Em: The Best Picture Winners of the '80s

Decade by decade, I'm ranking the winners of the Academy Award for Best Picture.  From greatest to least great, here's the '80s.  And I warn you that it's been a long while since I've seen a lot of these films.

Amadeus (1984) - This was an easy choice because "Amadeus" is one of my cinematic touchstones.  I've written about it before, so I'll just say here that my appreciation of the film has only grown with time, especially the performances and the use of Mozart's music.  Also, I prefer the original theatrical cut to the Special Edition, and it galls me that it's so much harder to find that version these days.  Other notable nominees of these Oscars included "The Killing Fields" and David Lean's "A Passage to India."

Rain Man (1988) - Dustin Hoffman had an almost miraculous run of great roles, and I always thought that Raymond Babbitt was in many ways the last.  Hoffman did plenty of great work later, but he peaked with Raymond, a savant who is simultaneously both endearing and utterly infuriating.  With Tom Cruise delivering one of his better, truly underappreciated performances, the two have undeniable comedy chemistry, and emotional rapport.  And this fuels a buddy road movie of unusual poignancy and joy.  

Gandhi (1982) - Thank goodness Richard Attenborough cast Ben Kingsley as Mahatma Gandhi over a bigger name.  I cannot conceive of how this movie could have worked otherwise.  "Gandhi" is mostly remembered as a feat of epic filmmaking, with a cast of thousands.  What it really is, even more than it is a biopic, is a country's founding myth.  The Gandhi depicted in the film is not the historical figure, but a human ideal intended to awe and inspire.  Let's face it though.  "E.T." really should have won.

The Last Emperor (1987) - I have to make the disclaimer that nostalgia plays a significant part in how I ranked this film, as it was a big deal in my community to have a film depict this period of Chinese history.  And a massive epic directed by Bernardo Bertolucci, was an especially validating thing to see.  In retrospect, like "Gandhi," this is a simplified and often inaccurate historical biopic.  As spectacle, however, it's cinematic catnip.  And I'm still furious that none of the actors were nominated.

Terms of Endearment (1983) - The beloved James L. Brooks weepie features one of the great onscreen mother/daughter relationships of all time, with stellar performances from Shirley Maclaine and Debra Winger.  I tend to remember this one as a cancer movie more than anything else, with some particularly gutting hospital scenes, and am always presently surprised by the appearance of Jack Nicholson.  However, it's not one of my favorites, and probably wouldn't have won in a more competitive year.

Platoon (1986) - The reputation of "Platoon" boils down to the fact that it's a Vietnam War movie made by a director who actually served and experienced the carnage.  I don't think it's as good as "Apocalypse Now" or "The Deer Hunter," but "Platoon" is undeniably authentic and deeply personal.  It  would also catapult Oliver Stone into the spotlight, and into the right position where he could make better films.  It's a very deserving winner, though I'd argue that Roland Jaffe's "The Mission" is just as good.  

Driving Miss Daisy (1989) - This is a nice, pleasant, feel-good  film, and I bear it no ill will.  The performances are good and the production is solid on every front.  Unfortunately, it reflects a certain attitude from Hollywood about depictions of race relations that has stuck around for way, way too long.  More on that when we get to "Green Book."  I probably would have picked "Born on the Fourth of July" for this year, though "My Left Foot" and "Field of Dreams" were also strong contenders.

Out of Africa (1985) - I have beef with "Out of Africa," because it seems obvious to me that "The Color Purple" should have won Best Picture, with "Witness" in second place.  Lovely cinematography and the John Barry score aside, I don't see how Meryl on her farm in Africa, having a love affair, rates higher.  Maybe I saw this at the wrong time in my life, when I was younger and too impatient, but the romantic colonialist notions and the gallant doomed pilot just failed to hold any interest for me.     

Chariots of Fire (1981) - The Vangelis instrumental is great, but this British sports drama is a bore.  You've got a movie about Olympic runners and anti-Semitism, and it's an unbearable drag.  I barely remember anything positive, and it doesn't surprise me that it's the most notable thing that anyone involved with its creation has made.  Frankly, I'm stumped as to how this beat out heavy hitters like "Reds" and "On Golden Pond."  Even "Raiders of the Lost Ark" would have at least been a memorable choice.   

Ordinary People (1980) - Finally, I hesitate to call this one of the worst Best Picture winners because it's a well-intentioned film about mental health that was pretty daring for its time.  However, it's aged terribly, especially in the way that it demonizes Mary Tyler Moore's character.  It's also one of those unfortunate winners where literally any of the other nominees would have been a better pick.  "Raging Bull" should have won, and if not "Raging Bull," then "The Elephant Man" or "Coal Miner's Daughter."

----

Why Did I Bother With "Morbius" and "Uncharted"?

I knew that "Uncharted" and "Morbius" were both very poorly reviewed films that nobody liked, and yet I still went ahead and watched them.  They both typify the kind of formulaic, action-adventure blockbuster that gets past my defenses because they resemble movies I've liked in the past, and there are actors involved who I generally enjoy.  In the case of "Uncharted," I was onboard for Tom Holland, and in the case of "Morbius," for Matt Smith and Jared Harris.  And in both cases I came away from the films a little mad that I'd let myself be duped again.

I mean, look at "Uncharted."  I have no knowledge of the video game series this was based on, but I knew that everyone wanted Nathan Fillion to play its hero, Nathan Drake, for the past twenty years, but the filmmakers couldn't get their act together in time for that to happen.  Instead, they opted for a prequel with Holland playing a young Nathan Drake, being mentored by an older treasure hunter played by Mark Wahlberg.  And good grief, Wahlberg is at his most absolutely insufferable here, in full toxic swaggering asshole mode.  Wahlberg was originally supposed to play Drake, as I understand it, and I probably would have skipped "Uncharted" entirely if that had happened.  

In short, the buddy comedy never works because Wahlberg is being such a killjoy the entire time.  The generic female lead, played by newcomer Sophia Ali is constantly being sidelined and abandoned, and clearly the writers had no idea what to do with her.  Antonio Banderas and Tati Gabrielle pop up a few times as the villains, because you have to have colorful villains in an "Indiana Jones" ripoff.  And "Uncharted" is such an "Indiana Jones" ripoff, and a "Mummy" ripoff, and even a "National Treasure" ripoff.  It's got a few decent action sequences, but the rest of the time it's just half-heartedly playing out the beats of a treasure hunt movie, while throwing out self-aware quips about being in a treasure hunt movie.  The cynical attitude just kills it for me.  I think Holland would actually be fine as the lead if the movie would ever let him just be the wide-eyed kid we know he can play, instead of making him awkwardly snark off against Wahlberg. 

The "Uncharted" fans clearly aren't happy with the end result either.  I've seen more than a few frustrated reviews pointing out that the Sandra Bullock rom-com adventure throwback, "The Lost City" is a better "Uncharted" movie than the "Uncharted" movie, because that one at least bothered to commit to the treasure hunting storyline.  In short, the "Uncharted" movie fell victim to one of the classic perils of video game adaptations - they forgot why their intended audience liked this franchise in the first place.  There was no need to broaden the appeal of a premise that already had a very broad appeal to begin with, and mess around with the DNA of a character that everybody already liked.  

Now "Morbius" is a somewhat more forgivable misfire than "Uncharted," but it's still a misfire.    I know even less about the source material here, except that this is a comics character from the Marvel universe that has ties to Spider-man.  Jared Leto plays Michael Morbius, a genius with a rare blood disorder that keeps him sickly.  In the pursuit of a cure, he accidentally turns himself into a vampire-like creature with bat-based powers.  It feels a bit like his creator tried to out-Batman Batman, as Morbius has super strength, echolocation, feeds on blood, and can fly under certain circumstances.  The villain is Morbius's foster brother Milo, played by Matt Smith, who suffers the same condition, and is less worried about the consequences of a potential cure.

There are some interesting bits and pieces here, mostly very underdeveloped as the film speedruns through Morbius's angsty mad doctor routine.  I will give it due credit for being a horror movie first and a superhero movie second.  All the action takes place at night, and some of the frightful visuals will keep small children at bay.   Morbius looks absolutely ghastly in vampire mode, and he looks even worse when he's not.  The film has the same aesthetics as the "Venom" movies, which it shares a universe with.  There's a lot of blobby CGI flying around, lots of glowy colors, and comic-book flourishes.  And like "Venom," it doesn't bother about having much of a story except the most basic beats borrowed from "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" and "Frankenstein."  

  

In other circumstances, I could see "Morbius" working, but this film is too beholden to its franchise predecessors.  It rushes through its origin story to set up a Sinister Six film.  It trades in character moments for endless effects scenes of Morbius transforming into vampire or human form.  Humor is scarce and heart is even scarcer.  The movie even has the annoying habit of skipping ahead to payoffs and punchlines it never bothered to set up properly, and we have far too little time with some of the secondary characters like the mentor figure played by Jared Harris.  It rankles all the more that this is a good cast, and director Daniel Espinoza has delivered good movies before.  However, the film's problems run deep, and even a delay of nearly two years couldn't solve them.  

---

About That Nicholas Cage Movie

I'm not much of a Nicholas Cage fan.  I mean, I respect his work as an actor and I've enjoyed a lot of his films, especially "Raising Arizona."  However, I'm not a Nicholas Cage in the modern sense, meaning the Nicholas Cage who has become a pop culture icon for his over-the-top, intense performances in ever-more-ludicrous action films.  I preferred "Pig" to "Prisoners of the Ghostland."  And "The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent" is really all about this version of Nicholas Cage, the larger-than-life persona who the filmmakers have decided to build a meta action film around.

There have been perfectly decent meta films like this before, such as the Jean-Claude Van Damme dark comedy "JCVD."  "Unbearable Weight" follows the same template, portraying Cage as an actor going through a rough patch professionally and personally.  He's given a fictional family, an ex-wife, Olivia (Sharon Horgan), and a teen daughter, Addy (Lily Sheen), he's trying to do right by.  We watch him lose a coveted role and make plans for his retirement from acting.  Then he accepts a $1 million offer from a Spanish businessman, Javi (Pedro Pascal), to make an appearance at his birthday party.  Then the CIA gets involved, and a pair of agents (Tiffany Haddish and Ike Barinholtz) recruit him into their investigation of Javi as an arms dealer and the likely kidnapper of a politician's daughter, Maria (Katrin Vankova).

Javi turns out to be an aspiring screenwriter, and he and Cage spend most of the movie bantering about movies and screenwriting.  There's a lot of Nicholas Cage hero worship and a lot of rather wholesome male bonding before the movie turns into the high-octane action movie that we know it's destined to be.  However, "Unbearable Weight" only had a budget of $30 million, not enough to pay for the amount of mayhem that Cage fans might expect.  Watching Pascal and Cage pal around in Majorca is fun, but I think the film is only really going to resonate with other Nicholas Cage fans who will get all the jokes and references to films like "Mandy," "The Rock," and "Face/Off."  I've heard some claims that every Nicholas Cage movie is referenced here somewhere, and I wouldn't doubt that.  However, references alone do not a movie make.

Frankly, there's a lot of the film's construction that doesn't really work.  The family troubles are trite and boring. The artistic crisis isn't remotely convincing.   The fictionalized Nicholas Cage is simply not as interesting as the real life version, as a cursory glance through his Wikipedia page reveals all sorts of fun fodder for a future biopic that I sincerely hope gets made someday.  There's a running gag with Cage arguing with a younger, more ideal version of himself from the "Con Air" era, that reminded me an awful lot of Cage's work as Charlie and Donald Kaufman from "Adaptation."  However, "Adaptation" did meta commentary on screenwriting so much better than "Unbearable Weight," it makes this movie's shortcomings all the more obvious.  I mean, the Cage double was probably one of the more expensive effects in the movie, and the movie doesn't even bother to pay off the gag.  

I feel like I'm being ungenerous towards a film that does mostly succeed in being entertaining.  It has some clever one-liners and good performances.  Pedro Pascal is at his genial best, and Nicholas Cage is clearly putting in some effort to give his fans what they want.  As a movie nerd, I can't help loving the invocations of "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" and "Paddington 2."  This is also an original script and premise, and there can never be too many of those around.  I guess I'm just frustrated that "Unbearable Weight" isn't a better version of the movie that it is, that it plays it safe and isn't remotely as funny as it could be.  I can't help wondering what the Lonely Island guys or David Gordon Green could have done with this premise - and David Gordon Green has a cameo in this movie! 

Nicholas Cage, wherever you are, I've loved your work for years.  Clearly, the filmmakers behind this film did too, which is the best thing I can say about it.  But it's not enough.

---