It is hard to understate how difficult it is to create a movie in which Keanu Reeves and Seth Rogen share screen time and manage to sound exactly the same. Through some uninspired choices in the writing and directorial departments from Aziz Ansari, “Good Fortune” unfurled its angelic wings Oct. 17, only to find they were too small to handle the weight of its own expectations. Packed with a star-studded cast and fantastic visuals, this film falls short in too many categories to be considered a top contender for the year.
The story follows the lives of two men and an angel, whose plan is to swap their lives and show them perspectives they might have been missing. The angel Gabriel (Reeves) starts his journey as the angel who protects people from texting and driving accidents. He takes to his duties as any mortal would for their 9-5 job until he meets a man whom he considers to be a “lost soul.” Played by the film’s director, Arj (Ansari) is a man trying to make ends meet through small jobs around the Los Angeles area through a mobile app called “Task Sergeant.” He lives outside of his car, hoping for an opportunity to arise. He meets and works for a wealthy man named Jeff (Rogen), who ends up being involved in the life swap created by Gabriel.
The film’s trifecta of Jeff, Arj and Gabriel sounds great on paper: two flawed men who live on opposite sides of the financial scale with an angel to see the positive side of both lives. However, all three men do not seem to be different enough from the get-go. All three of them are written to talk and are directed to speak the exact same way, regardless of character backgrounds or story. As a viewer, movies with characters that conflict toward the beginning and grow to become more agreeable toward the end tend to be more interesting films because there is a sense of progression throughout the film. With “Good Fortune,” our characters remain static in how they treat each other until the plot dictates them to act otherwise.
As a brief example: Arj makes a choice to use a company credit card given by Jeff to pay for a meal. Jeff — despite the fact that he has built a good relationship with Arj and understands the amount of work Arj puts into his company — fires Arj on the spot. Nothing was established about what to use and not use the card for before this moment. Jeff’s attitude flips due to the plot, not because of any meaningful moment in his character. He is written up to that point in the film to be a guy that trusts Arj to pay the money back, not someone who would remove him from the company. This is a consistent problem throughout the film, where characters are only forced into moments because the plot tells them to. Characters should guide the plot, not the other way around.
Conversations between the characters are written exactly the same, from the movie’s start to finish. Rogen and Reeves are an interesting actor partnership as they bring two uniquely different skill sets to the table, but the film gives them the same assignment throughout. Instead of playing to the actors’ strengths, Reeves is forced into awkward comedy segments that do not land, and Rogen uses his signature cadence with clunky bits of comedy that feels forced. The cast all talk and sound the same, and for an audience, that can get grating after a while.
The same applies for Arj in this film. His more tender moments in the film sound exactly like the moments where he tries to apply comedy. The dialogue written and the directorial choices for our characters end up limiting the range of the film’s actors, leaving the film to feel inauthentic and sterile.
On a positive note, the film’s visuals are really solid. The cinematography and lighting department worked overtime to deliver sharp contrast throughout every shot, keeping the audience engaged despite the characters on screen lacking in any real substance to them. The visuals tended to do much of the film’s heavy lifting in keeping audience engagement.
The set design for this film also demonstrated some real quality. Even though filming took place on location around Los Angeles, it is important to keep the scenes from feeling as stale as real life can be. Numerous restaurants throughout the film have their own unique atmospheres, demonstrating a strong attention to detail of the city’s constant cultural mesh of flavor and flair. The grimy jobs that Gabriel and Jeff are forced to undertake during the life swap feel just like that: grimy and full of the intensity that comes with surviving off of the bare minimum. The kitchens are packed, and the motels feel musty and stale.
Despite its flaws, “Good Fortune” tries to deliver a nice message toward the end. That no matter what your occupation or place in life, your life matters and should be fought for. While this may hit for some at the end of the movie, the characters have not arrived at this ending naturally. They have leaped across any sort of consistent development for the same couple of jokes over and over, and as a result, “Good Fortune” feels underdeveloped and, perhaps, in sore need for a pair of bigger wings.
