Good Heavens, What Silly Men

Aziz Ansari’s directorial debut fails to deliver the magic, despite Keanu Reeves and Keke Palmer’s best efforts.

· 2 min read
Good Heavens, What Silly Men
Reeves, with wings.

Good Fortune
Regal Cinemas Jack London
In Theaters Everywhere

I strolled into a matineé showing of “Good Fortune,” a light-hearted and goofy but earnest buddies comedy promising lots of laughs and solid acting from leads Keanu Reeves, Seth Rogen, and writer-director Aziz Ansari, slightly damp and preoccupied by pains, more than primed for a good time. The film delivered on quippy one-liners, the aforementioned solid performances (along more notable but far smaller roles played by Keke Palmer and Sandra Oh), and a genuine effort to encourage goodness and friendship, but little else.

Perhaps my hopes had been too high, resting on Reeves and Oh, clips of their silly back-and-forths from the trailers indicating not only more of a leading lady positioning for Oh but generally a more balanced and darker look at the world. But the 98-minute run time had me struggling not to check my phone for the time, wondering when we would be served something deeper than the most surface of levels.

Ansari stars as Arj, a car-dwelling near-sucidial member of LA’s gig economy, at odd with Rogen as Jeff, an uber-wealthy tech moron with a penchant for saunas and being basic. Cue Gabriel (Reeves), a low-level angel with an interest in human lives. Gabriel’s desire to help—to feel useful, to have an assignment of more weight than texting and driving, which people really do love to do—leads to undue meddling, and the next thing you know a swap occurs, Gabriel loses his wings, and the boys all learn big life lessons.

Given Ansari’s public persona and breakout role on Parks and Rec, I suppose my expectations of cultural critique, the possibility of women as real characters, or any true introspection that doesn’t end in a giggle and self-deprecating “but how could I possibly know or do better, I’m just a boy!” smirk were unfair. A freaky fortnight of uninspired rich-boy debauchery in the guise of growth, with a gratuitous dose of sexualization of Reeves for good measure, paired with equally uninspiring and repetitive shots (I have to assume that is no fault of cinematographer Adam Newport-Berra, as it was technically precise and visually beautiful, just incredibly one-note, boring, the close range of focus something I found to be a poor choice for so many of the shots) made for a perfectly fine film if you want more of Rogen and Ansari as they were 15 years ago, just with more cash. Hard to say if Ansari has in fact learned any of the lessons he sought to emphasize (incredibly bluntly, at that) through this script. Reeves and Palmer were both excellent, but I would far rather see them shine in material that allows for them to be more (pardon me) human.