When a movie gets a poor rating despite a good star cast you wonder what’s wrong with the movie. But if you ignore the rating and go watch Going in Style, you’ll be convinced, like I was, that something is wrong with the audience.
Dwindling down to two inconveniently timed shows (mid-afternoon and late late night) the movie offered me no great imperative to see it. And yet at the behest of a friend, (thanks AP) I thought one must see why Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine and Alan Arkin got it all wrong. If nothing else we could see them doing some great work in a mediocre movie.
The film was good. Period.
Not sure why the naysayers and the haters hated it. Not sure why they were stingy with the stars. I can only put that down to poor comprehension and feel sorry for the lowly souls. They are probably better off in a theatre full of Govinda fans to stimulate their intellect. And I do hope they spend the rest of their lives with bad coffee. (There! Vindicated!)
Anyway, now to the film. I needn’t mention that the cast was good and carried the movie right from the start. (I know this is a remake but even then! Casting does take the cake.)
It’s simple. You’re a pensioner (which the three protagonists are) and you are now told you’re not getting a pension. I get that. And being closer to that age, I get it very well. So, what’s one supposed to do.
Caught in a bank heist as he argues with an arrogant heartless banker, Joe (Michael Caine) realizes that for the three of them that is the best bet out. Brilliant thinking, I must say. What they have on their side may not be age but they do have the smarts – the experience. And that’s how the plot builds up.
You say it can become predictable but it does not. The thing about the movie that most people don’t get is not how they manage the heist but how they get away with it. And ‘in style’.
The approach to the heist too is very matter-of-fact. A cold calculation is made of an indicative life span for each of them in Michael Caine’s no nonsense manner and an amount calculated that they would ‘take’ from the bank.
The supporting network with John Ortiz as Jesus the ‘accessory to the crime’ is a credible character to say the least. And so is the inspector – in his humorless demeanor. Of course, a word must be put in for the little girl with her doll.
The dialogues are curt and witty and the plot and characters credible. I’d give it 4 out of 5 on entertainment value! It may not be an edge-of-the-seat, nail-biting, watch-from-between-your-fingers thriller but it still has its share of smiles and laughs.
In its pure essence, the film portrays optimism in the twilight zone, camaraderie among the three geriatrics and of course, a restrained sense of humour. It’s ageist in the sense that it portrays age as is – something that slows down your body but not your mind. And in the end, it reminds us that no matter how you accept your mortality, there is something that needs to keep you going, something that will keep the spark alive. Even if it is a bank heist!
It’s an easy evening watch and if you are closer to a pension than others, you’ll enjoy it even more.
(If you’re not, I suggest you start saving now, because, young man, there’s no way you’re managing a bank heist without watching it!)