Isn’t there supposed to be, uhm, I don’t know, a question-mark or something?
Steve Dallas (Owen Wilson) is the weatherman at a local news station and doesn’t really seem to take much initiative with his life. Sure, he wants to have money, and as much sex as he can possibly stomach, but for the most part, he’s just sitting around, smoking pot, and hanging with his childhood buddy, Ben (Zach Galifianakis). That begins to all change, however, when Ben’s dad dies and leaves him the large farmland they grew up on; whereas his sister, Terry (Amy Poehler) isn’t left with much, except a little store they own in town. This leaves her a bit pissed-off and a bit vengeful, but for Ben, this leaves him wondering what he’s going to do with his life, or whether he’s actually up to the task of handling this much responsibility. But while this is all happening, Steve’s still just doing his thing, but this time, he finds his eyes looking at Terry and Ben’s much-younger stepmother, Angela (Laura Ramsey), who, if he shacks up with, might be able to change his life for the better. That’s if he can put down the joint.
Though I know many people are head-over-heels with the show, I’m not particularly as much of a fan of Mad Men. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve watched pretty much all of it (or as much as Netflix allows me to) to make up my mind concerning and honestly, I still like it very much, but it’s not one of those shows I’d consider a favorite of mine. It’s well-written, acted, and performed, but as a whole, the show just isn’t one I crave to watch, day in and day out.
However, comparing Mad Men as a whole, to everything in Are You Here, is downright wrong. Not because the themes of both works are different, but because the former is so much more well-done and thought-out than the former, that the two don’t even deserve to be talked about in the same conversation. But that’s what’s so strange here, because how somebody like Matthew Weiner can go from creating a smart, well-detailed show like Mad Men, to writing/directing a jumbled-up piece of junk such as this is totally beyond me.
Mostly though, it’s less about how Weiner went from the highest of highs, to then stoop all the way down to the lowest of lows, and more just about what’s going on with this movie.
For instance, Weiner never seems capable once of landing on a tone and sticking with it. One part of this movie is supposed to be something of a “bro comedy”, where we see two dudes slumming around, smoking pot, and talking about the environment, but then the next part of this movie is trying to be a wholesome family-drama about going back to your roots and being in a time and place that’s much simpler. It doesn’t gel quite well, and it gets incredibly worse once we’re introduced to the possible love-angle between Wilson’s character and Ramsay’s; not because it isn’t believable at all (it isn’t), but because the age-difference is so huge between the two, that it’s not even romantic. In fact, it’s totally creepy and makes you wonder if Wilson just likes taking these roles for the sole reason that he gets to hook up with a bunch of pretty, young things. I don’t blame him if that is the reason, but come on, man, make the movies better, at least.
Speaking of Wilson, his character, Steve Dallas, is totally all-over-the-place. We’re supposed to get the idea that this guys’a stoner-bro that is a bit of a cheap-skate and rips people off whenever he gets the first chance to do so, but we never find out why. His credit card hardly works, but why? What’s gotten him into so much debt that he’s so quick to take any hand-out thrown at him? This is never known to us and it gets even worse when we’re told to believe in the friendship between him and Galifianakis’ character.
Once again, we’re told that Dallas is a close friend of the family, but we never see that. Instead, we just see Dallas bicker and banter with the members of the family and act like a total dick. Same goes for Galifianakis’s Ben who, like all Galifianakis character’s, is weird, manic, and always on the verge of a nervous-breakdown. Why this is? Well, we never really find out and it’s made worse by the fact that the character of Ben (a environmental-activist who has to start living and accepting in the real world) isn’t a particularly interesting one, or even well-written. He’s just dull and stale, yet for some reason, we’re supposed to think of him as the heart and soul of this project – an idea that’s never actually felt to us, but just told.
And honestly, it’s a shame because you can tell that none of this is really the cast’s fault; everybody here is clearly trying, but Weiner’s script is so poorly-written and scatter-shot, it takes away from what could have been a very sweet, relateable dramedy. Instead, it’s just something that has no idea what it wants to be about, what it wants to say, or what it even wants to do with any of its characters. It almost makes you wonder: What did Weiner try to accomplish with this movie? Was he trying to get across the idea of “if you’re true to yourself, then those around you will follow suit”? Or, is he trying to send a tribute to those who go back to their childhood homes and reclaim what’s rightfully theirs? Personally, I don’t know and I don’t even think Weiner himself knows.
What I do know is that when Mad Men ends next year, we better hope that Weiner has a better jump to features than this. Because if not, we’re all going to be wanting a whole lot more of this.
Consensus: Off, not just in terms of tone, but what it’s even trying to accomplish, Are You Here is literally all over the place, which makes it hard for the talented cast and crew involved to do anything interesting, or worth merit. They’re probably just as confused as we are.
2 / 10 = Crapola!!