Will Ferrell and Julia Louis-Dreyfus are two of the most talented and successful comedy actors in recent decades. Nat Faxon and Jim Rash form a Oscar-winning writing duo capable producing moving, thoughtful work full of heart and humor. Force Majeure, the film on which "Downhill" is based, is a powerhouse of picture, one of effective dark comedy and pungent drama. With all these forces seemingly playing in favor of "Downhill," it seemed like the movie was an inevitable hit.
So, why did it whiff so miserably?
A major issue with the film is its lack of subtlety. None of the characters' flaws or any of the developing sources of conflict are unveiled with any level of showmanship. They're clumsily slapped onto the screen with the same level of delicate touch that a toddler uses to finger paint. The only difference is what the toddler creates will ultimately be colorful and show signs of life.
Another massive flaw (I'll stop with two since I don't need belabor the point with excessive cruelty) is the apparent fear that went into the writing. All the punches were pulled. There are so many moments that walk right up to the edge of making an emotional impact, delivering laugh, or doing something of worth, but they cautiously pull back before completing the mission. We're left with an empty feeling at every turn.
For those who are unfamiliar with the film's premise, the plot revolves around a mom and dad who take their two kids on a ski vacation. During an avalanche that takes place while the family is sitting at the café table, dad runs away, leaving his family helpless and alone. It turns out the avalanche was controlled and posed no real danger, unbeknownst to the vacationers. Dad returns to his trembling family and acts as though nothing happened. Mom is ticked.
It's a rough look for dad, as he has lost the respect of his wife and kids. He proceeds to make excuses and deny responsibility for what happened. So, mom takes the atrociously bad advice of a concierge at their ski resort and decides to "live her best life" or something like that. Evidently, her best life includes breaking the fidelity of her marriage and touching herself in a bathroom stall. To each their own I suppose.
Mom's exploration of her true desires could have been funny and revealing. Eventually, one would assume, she would learn the error of that way of living. But she never learns that lesson. Instead, the movie simply abandons that plotline after 15 minutes or so. Oh well, her best life would have been a first round elimination at the best life qualifying tournament. Not much interesting stuff going on with her.
Mercifully, the movies sputters to a halt after a weakly realized pseudo-reconciliation for the family. Then, because the writers weren't quite finished firing blanks, the final scene orchestrates a scenario similar to the avalanche from early in the movie. This time, mom, dad, and the other adults involved all fend for themselves. The point exactly of this moment is unclear. It'll leave audiences everywhere shrugging as the credits roll and they turn to person next to them and exchange a look that says, "I'm sure glad that's over."
So, why did it whiff so miserably?
A major issue with the film is its lack of subtlety. None of the characters' flaws or any of the developing sources of conflict are unveiled with any level of showmanship. They're clumsily slapped onto the screen with the same level of delicate touch that a toddler uses to finger paint. The only difference is what the toddler creates will ultimately be colorful and show signs of life.
Another massive flaw (I'll stop with two since I don't need belabor the point with excessive cruelty) is the apparent fear that went into the writing. All the punches were pulled. There are so many moments that walk right up to the edge of making an emotional impact, delivering laugh, or doing something of worth, but they cautiously pull back before completing the mission. We're left with an empty feeling at every turn.
For those who are unfamiliar with the film's premise, the plot revolves around a mom and dad who take their two kids on a ski vacation. During an avalanche that takes place while the family is sitting at the café table, dad runs away, leaving his family helpless and alone. It turns out the avalanche was controlled and posed no real danger, unbeknownst to the vacationers. Dad returns to his trembling family and acts as though nothing happened. Mom is ticked.
It's a rough look for dad, as he has lost the respect of his wife and kids. He proceeds to make excuses and deny responsibility for what happened. So, mom takes the atrociously bad advice of a concierge at their ski resort and decides to "live her best life" or something like that. Evidently, her best life includes breaking the fidelity of her marriage and touching herself in a bathroom stall. To each their own I suppose.
Mom's exploration of her true desires could have been funny and revealing. Eventually, one would assume, she would learn the error of that way of living. But she never learns that lesson. Instead, the movie simply abandons that plotline after 15 minutes or so. Oh well, her best life would have been a first round elimination at the best life qualifying tournament. Not much interesting stuff going on with her.
Mercifully, the movies sputters to a halt after a weakly realized pseudo-reconciliation for the family. Then, because the writers weren't quite finished firing blanks, the final scene orchestrates a scenario similar to the avalanche from early in the movie. This time, mom, dad, and the other adults involved all fend for themselves. The point exactly of this moment is unclear. It'll leave audiences everywhere shrugging as the credits roll and they turn to person next to them and exchange a look that says, "I'm sure glad that's over."