I wanted the remake of “Going in Style” from 1978 to at least be good. Well, I have to say it is, but that’s almost damning with faint praise today. I also wanted it to be just as special as the original. Sadly, it isn’t. I’m not saying that 2017’s remake of “Going in Style” is terrible since it isn’t, but it also comes up miles short when weighed against the original, what was a much better drama. But then again, the remake’s director is a former sitcom star now behind the camera and he’s not Martin Brest, who did the original. In the end, you’ll certainly enjoy the remake of “Going in Style,” but you’ll be much better served by a far superior film to watch the original – and click here to read my review of it.
‘Going in Style’
(2017; 96 minutes; rated PG-13; directed by Zach Braff and starring Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Alan Arkin)
NO STYLE POINTS FOR THIS ‘GOING’ REMAKE
(NOTE: I expanded this review with additional opinion and trivia and the updating of links on Nov. 12, 2021.)
Zach Braff should have stuck to starring in and directing some “Scrubs” episodes on TV. What he didn’t need to do is direct the remake of “Going in Style.” While the remake isn’t bad, and, at worst you’d call it watchable, it fails where it should have done best – update a wonderful dramatic film. But I guess that’s too much to ask as Hollywood “reboots” films out of lack of any creativity and then with a lack of ability.
(CLICK HERE FOR ALL MY MOVIE REVIEWS)
Well, “Going in Style” for 2017 is an update – I hate the term “reboot” – and it has updated problems for three elderly gents, but what it doesn’t have is any real drama about the lives of the elderly … and this single point is the driving force that made the original so special.
On the plus side, this reboot doesn’t get help from or is driven by CGI special effects. The original is plot- and character-driven and didn’t rely on special effects and, thankfully, the new one didn’t take the opportunity to fall into this trap. “Going in Style” from 1978 (click here for my review) was mostly a dark look how the now-vacant the lives of three men evolved through the erosion of life through time and then rattling to a pyrrhic conclusion for each as the film played out.
Fast forward nearly 40 years and you wind up with Branff’s feel-good ending on story where they try to get revenge on corporate slime for stealing their pension. It in no way conveys the power of the original. Heck, one of the old men in the remake even finds himself getting really frisky in the boudoir.
Wow!
In the original, the three geezers used the robbery to spice up lives that had had any meaning drained from them by time and circumstance beyond their control and then they paid the price for it. In today’s version you get meaning so shallow it can’t even be called a puddle, but it does make corporate garbage an acceptable piling-on point.
The only good parallel between the two films is the stars.
Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Alan Arkin each equal the effort of George Burns, Art Carney and Lee Strasberg in the original and without this level of talent, the remake would simply have been horrid. What would have been really, really interesting is what original director Martin Brest could have done with the current trio of actors since he got so much out of the original three.
So, go ahead and click here to read my review of the original. I’m not going to spend any more time on it (well, maybe a little). Here’s how the remake breaks down …
Three elderly friends – Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Alan Arkin – are trudging along in their old age when disaster strikes. They’re losing their somewhat meager but sustaining pensions to corporate greedheads. Everybody can get behind hating corporations and the banks that help them and this is an OK update on the original. After that the film falls into the trap of stereotypes, stupid antics and basically today’s lack-of-creativity in making a motion picture.
The only spark of intelligence in the plot revolves around Caine and his granddaughter and her estranged father. The interpersonal stuff here is a great idea, but it’s as if it was plopped down without any concern that it truly fit in. Actually, the subplot about them would have better made an entire film, especially with Caine and the supporting actors who played the granddaughter and estranged father and the excellent level of work each of the three accomplished.
Ah, I digress, so let’s go back to the guys …
Our trio plot a robbery of their own bank that’s helping sink their pensions and pull it off. However, they get big breaks in foiling the FBI and there are a few neat twists to the plot along this line – the explanation of their alibis is fun and actually well thought out. The whole thing winds upbeat at the ending credits for the trio at every level. Go to the ending credits.
Here’s a look at some of the primary cast:
- A two-time Oscar winner, Caine plays “Joe Harding” and he is the leader of the group and has the character with the best backstory. He is smooth and gives his usual solid performance. You can just feel the drama exuding from him but that he had to reign in because of the paucity of the screenplay. His Oscar pedigree goes back to the 1960s with wins for “The Cider House Rules” and “Hannah and Her Sisters” and has four nominations going back to 1966’s “Alfie.” I liked him in both “California Suite” (click here for my review) and a spy thriller called “The Fourth Protocol” (click here for my review).
- An Oscar winner and four-time nominee (not for this one), Freeman is the equal of his co-stars as “Willie Davis,” but he has a little bit less to work with and so doesn’t distinguish himself. It’s not that it’s a deficient part, but you never sense that he won’t be saved and see a bright future. No matter what his predicament – and I won’t spoil it here – and you’ll find Freeman being Freeman. He’s fun to watch and, like Caine, puts out a smooth performance with aplomb. In his varied career choices, I liked him in “Invictus” as well as “The Dark Knight” and “Last Vegas.” He won his Oscar for Clint Eastwood’s “Million Dollar Baby” and has been nominated for “Invictus,” “Driving Miss Daisy” and “Street Smart.” I won’t mention the name of the film for his fourth since it stars one of Hollywood’s prime idiots whose films I don’t watch (and didn’t watch that one and so I didn’t see the job he did that earned him the nomination).
- An Oscar winner and three-time nominee (not for this one), Arkin does the best job of the trio playing “Albert Garner.” He conveys his character much better than either Caine or Freeman. You get jittery, too, when you watch his anxieties ooze out during the film. Arkin isn’t a big name and isn’t always mentioned when you hear an “actor’s actor,” but he’s that in triplicate. He knows how to wrap himself up in a role and keep you rolling right along with him. Arkin wasn’t as good in “Freebie and the Bean” (click here for my review) and I truly enjoyed him in the original “The In-Laws” as well as being excellent in the tremendous (except for the stunningly ignorant and mostly talentless Alec Baldwin) “Glengarry Glen Ross.” He won his Oscar for “Little Miss Sunshine” and was nominated for “Argo” and two from the 1960s with “The Heart is a Lonely Hunter” and “The Russians are Coming! The Russians are Coming!” I also enjoyed his small turn as the anxious psychiatrist in “Grosse Pointe Blank” (click here for my review).
- Simply the best supporting turn is by three-time Primetime Emmy winner Christopher Lloyd, who plays the guys’ senile friend “Milton Kupchak,” who stumbles merrily from one scene to another. I don’t know how people whose lives have been affected by someone with dementia or Alzheimer’s would evaluate the comedy of someone displaying these characteristics, but Lloyd is really, really good here and his short time on screen is the most effectively used. Lloyd’s CV is too extensive and varied from TV to movies to highlight many, but you’ll remember him best as “Dr. Emmett Brown” in the “Back to the Future” franchise and he was in “The Boat Builder.” He has an impressive list of more than 200 credits from an extensive list of TV shows (from his most famous as “Jim” on “Taxi” that won him two Emmys to wonderful work as an aged alcoholic magician in a “Law & Order: Criminal Intent” episode), as well as movies and voicing for films.
- Nearly as good as Lloyd in a very small role is Siobhan Fallon Hogan as the waitress “Mitzi.” Hogan, who I’ll forgive for being in the overrated “Forrest Gump,” is another who manages to make working in front of a camera appear to be easy. She simply becomes the waitress and you’d probably order something from her. Hogan also had an outstanding small role in “Men in Black” and gave a memorable performance as a ticket agent in one of my personal favorite but little-remembered great comedies: “Big Trouble” (click here for my review).
- I was shocked to see two-time Oscar nominee (not for this one) Ann-Margaret here as “Annie Santori,” who is the love interest for Arkin. Damn. She’s 76 now and more than a generation ago at 52, she was the love interest in “Grumpy Old Men.” She does a commendable job here, but, really? I’d say an actor should only be the elderly love interest just once in her career. In any case, Ann-Margaret is affable, likable and pretty much solid. She wasn’t as good in the football stinker by the overrated Oliver Stone called “Any Given Sunday” and was nominated for “Tommy” and “Carnal Knowledge.”
- The only waste of talent here is how Oscar nominee (not for this one) Matt Dillon got saddled with a role that didn’t give him any room to show his talent. Dillon plays FBI Agent “Arlen Hamer” and he could have done so much more, but obviously not here. Dillon’s character is too one-dimensional and Dillon is no De Niro or Pacino to be able to elevate the mess of hand he was dealt. Of course, Dillon is most recognizable as “The Flamingo Kid” (click here for my review) and I also liked him co-starring in “Target” with the always-sensational Gene Hackman (click here for my review). He was nominated for “Crash” and I’d say I like him best in “There’s Something About Mary.”
- Finally, I take a moment to write about Joey King as “Brooklyn Harding” (Caine’s granddaughter) and Peter Serafinowicz as “Murphy,” who is King’s estranged father and Caine’s daughter’s ex-husband. Both do tremendous work in conveying their characters. King is too cool as the brainy young lady who is mature beyond her years and Serafinowicz simply wows you with his work as first while basically being in a drug stupor to wanting to become an actual father. Serafinowicz was in “Guardians of the Galaxy” as well as one of my favorite zombie flicks, “Shaun of the Dead” (click here for my review). King was in the TV version of “Fargo” as well as “Independence Day: Resurgence.”
Actually, there are too many neat supporting characters for me to delve into individually. They include the man who helps them plan the bank robbery, a young girl who doesn’t pick one of the old guys out of a police lineup, other family members and Josh Pais, who plays wimpy bank manager “Chuck Lofton.” All make excellent contributions – although I could have done without some of Pais’ antics, but I blame that on Banff’s deficiency, not the actor’s.
On the topic of parallels, here’s a look at the age differences for Burns-Caine, Carney-Arkin and Strasberg-Freeman from the original and remake:
REMAKE:
- Caine turned 84 the month before “Going in Style” premiere in April 2017.
- Arkin turned 83 the month before “Going in Style” premiere in April 2017.
- Freeman turned 80 two months after the “Going in Style” premiere in April 2017.
ORIGINAL:
- Burns was the oldest at 83 at the time of the premiere of the original “Going in Style” in 1979. He would die at the age of 100 in 1996.
- Carney was the youngest of the trio at 61 when the original was released. He would die at the age of 85 in 2003.
- Strasberg was 78 when the original was released. He would be the first of the trio to die and he passed away at the age of 80 in 1982.
I hope Braff does better with his next effort. He represents one of the young(er) vanguard of directors. However, since I enjoyed him in “Scrubs” so much, I’m hoping for a rebound. Hollywood needs creativity and despite him not even being creative in a “reboot” (which is not creative in and of itself), and I believe he can come through. Braff’s resume for directing includes seven episodes of the TV show as well as “Garden State,” which he also wrote and in which he starred. Good luck, Zach.
As of Aug. 25, 2017, “Going in Style” was the 35th ranked film at the domestic box office for the year with $45 million in sales, according to Box Office Mojo. On that day it was a little behind the stinker called “The Great Wall” (33rd with $45.1 million). On Aug. 24, 2017, the No. 1 film was Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast” with just over half-a-billion dollars and at No. 2 was “Wonder Woman” with $404.4 million. Here are the other films from 2017 that I’ve reviewed:
- “Baywatch” (not good, but watchable) – click here for my review
- “CHIPS” (horrible crap) – click here for my review
- “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” (great one) – click here for my review
Assorted cast and film notes (via IMDb.com):
- “Going in Style” is the sixth film with both Caine and Freeman.
- For the bank robbery, Caine-Arkin-Freeman wear masks portraying members of the vaunted “Rat Pack:” Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and Sammy Davis Jr. Bank robbers in the original “Point Break” wore masks showing U.S. presidents (click here for my review).
- Caine, Freeman and King appear in the “Dark Knight” trilogy.
- Directly from IMDb.com: “In a scene where the three men visit a hemp store, one of the flavors of marijuana is called ‘Strawberry Cough.’ In Children of Men, Michael Caine’s character named a marijuana strand the same name.”
- Finally and directly from IMDb.com: “Ann-Margret wears bangs down to the bridge of her nose in every scene.”
© Chuck Curry and A Gator in Naples, 2017, 2021.
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without
express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner
is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that
full and clear credit is given to Chuck Curry and A Gator in Naples
with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
A GATOR IN NAPLES 