Frank about Film

Hitman Review

They are finally back! Its your old friends Frank and Amhara, and they're here to review Richard Linklater's new Netflix romcom 'Hit man.' The film follows Gary (Glen Powel), a University psychology and philosophy professor, and a part time undercover cop. In his newly appointed role as an undercover cop, Gary posses as hitmen in sting operations to solicit muder for hire confessions. Gary invitably falls for Madison (Adria Ajorna) who hires his alter ego 'Ron'. And the two form a twisted relationship of alter egos, serial killer fetishing and gaslighting.

They agree that its a well made film well suited for casual homeviewing. But Frank argues its tonally boring and even a little bit cringe. Whereas Amhara thinks its lighthearted tone creates a fascinating juxtaposition to its rather twisted tale.

Duration:: 34m
Broadcast on:: 21 Jun 2024
Audio Format:: mp3

Owning a rental property sounds like a dream until you realize how much work goes into getting it ready. Determine a competitive rent price, market the property, schedule the showing screen, tenants drop the lease at a rent collection, handle maintenance request, maintenance application. Whew! Sound complicated? Renner's Warehouse is here to take the hard work off your rental to-do list. Qualify tenants, check, rent collection, check, maintenance coordination, you got it. Go to Rennerswearhouse.com for a free rental analysis to find out how much your home can rent for. Or call 303-974-9444, because from now on, the only thing you need on your to-do list is to call Rennerswearhouse. Well, we got a minute, and I'm going to buy that truck I've been wanting. Wait, don't you need, like, weeks to shop for a car? I don't. Carvana makes it super convenient to find exactly what I want. Hold up. You're buying a car on your phone? Isn't that more of a laptop thing? You can shop wherever you want. I like to do my research. Read reviews, compare models. Plus, Carvana has thousands of options. How'd you decide on that truck? Because I like it. Oh, that is a great reason. Go to Carvana.com to sell your car the convenient way. Hello. You're listening to Frank about film, the film podcast where we simply refuse to beat around the bush. I'm joined by Frank. Hi, Amara. And we are going to be talking about Hitman. Frank, could you illuminate us as to what Hitman is about? So, Hitman is the new romantic comedy from Richard Linklatter. It follows Gary, played by Glenn Powell, a university psychology and philosopher, professor, and a part-time undercover cop. As an undercover cop, Gary poses as Hitman in sting operations to solicit murder for higher confessions. Gary inevitably falls for Madison, played by Adria Adjorna, who hires his alter ego, "wrong", and the two form a twisted relationship of serial killer fetishism and gaslighting. Amara, what did you think of this film? I liked it. I didn't know what to expect because Richard Linklatter's kind of... It can be kind of unpredictable. He's directed different types of films. And I watched the trailer for this and thought, "This looks awful", but I kind of think it can't be that bad because it's Richard Linklatter, who's someone I respect. So, I was intrigued and I heard it was good, so I watched it and I enjoyed it. It's kind of like a B-movie and it's quite silly and kind of just fun. It does feel like a Netflix film in a lot of ways, but in some ways I think it's sort of better and smarter than you would expect from a film like this. What do you think? Well, I think that's a big part of what's going to form my sort of verdict. The fact that it is a Netflix film or was straight to home viewing. I don't know, maybe it had a very limited cinema run somewhere or even if it was just for awards or something, but anyhow, primarily home viewing, it feels fitting for that. I think it's a good casual viewing. Right, yeah. And you say it's got a bit of depth, but I don't think it has any mystique or anything to return to. I did actually watch it twice in preparation for this, but there was nothing really pulling me to watch it a second time. I just wanted to make clear some of the points or the feelings that I had on this, just to fully ingrain them in my mind. But I guess maybe that's the wonderful thing of it being straight to home viewing, that I can do that without any additional fees. Yes, that's a good point. You've watched it twice. I probably would watch it again just because it's the way the plot works out. It does get quite labyrinthine and not in a deep way, but there's lots of double crossings and details that you know that the characters don't know. And it does have quite a lot of fun with that. And I feel like maybe that the kind of puzzle would be interesting to revisit a second time. Do you think it changed any of your opinions watching at the second time? Or was it really just like, okay, this is just to confirm what I think about it. I suppose the second time I was able to grasp what they were setting up a bit more. It does this, as I said at the beginning, his university professor who teaches psychology and philosophy. And it repeatedly cuts back to his lectures throughout the film and the topics he's covering, parallel the themes of what's going on in the story. Or just sort of tells the audience very directly what it's trying to express through the characters and their actions. So there's a bit of hand holding through this. I think it's very casual viewing, it's very light hearted. I suppose fitting of the rom-con genre. I think it's very tonally lightweight and I think we're going to go more into that. I think it was quite monotonous and I think that's probably why it felt so casual to me. I was going to say, in terms of the tone and the genre, you're saying it's kind of a rom-com. I found it interesting how each maybe acts of the film just slightly and then towards the end quite extremely shifts what kind of a film it is. It starts out as a kind of screw-able comedy. It reminded me of comedies from the 2000s where they'll just be really over-the-top dialogue. Characters will say things like, "I'm going to shove this so far up your ass, you won't even be able to talk" and that kind of line. And then it kind of goes into more of a film noir vibe and when he starts falling in love with Madison. It's kind of like a film noir erotic romance and then it kind of goes quite heavy into that type of thing. And then we're sort of living in that world for a bit. And then towards the end it gets kind of like really kind of dark comedy and then it sort of ends with that. So it's interesting. It feels like it's never like too serious but it does kind of jump around in terms of tone according to what is happening in the film. And I usually don't like that kind of feeling of channel hopping or something where a film is constantly shifting gears. But it kind of worked for this film because it's about a person who is doing that themselves who is kind of like living completely different lives at once. And there's like a kind of triple layer of he's a teacher and then he's different hit men and according to whatever the situation requires. He then has to kind of go deeper into some of the hit men personalities. So I kind of like that. I don't know if you felt that as well. Well I'm surprised you felt that way. I thought it was quite monotone. I've always remained to be light and fluffy. I do think that there's parts of the story that are quite dark and gritty. Like he has fallen for someone that explicitly was hiring him or attempting to hire him to murder someone. And she's also fallen for someone that she thinks is a serial killer. So there's like a really sick twisted story and that's before all the whole gaslight in each other's stuff. But it feels just like watching a light rom-com during it. So I felt it was a bit disconnected. But I don't think it was disconnected in an interestingly juxtapositional tonal way. I felt like it was almost making out as if these characters are just fine. These are good people. But good people were in like the really lame box ticking sort of way. Like oh here's a scene where he's like picking up and playing with puppies. Here's a scene where he's running around and throwing a ball with kids. That sort of way. Okay I felt like the film was quite aware of that. I thought it was weirdly like because I think that objectively horrific people. I know it's funny because I've heard that criticism in other reviews. And I actually think that the film, the fun of the film for me is that it's putting characters like that who are maybe on some level good people into these very difficult situations and is forcing them to do bad things. And I think that the film is aware of that because there are characters in the film who comment on the fact that he's doing that for example. The fact that he's allowing her to believe in a fantasy. The fact that they do kind of quite terrible things later on in the film. Like I do feel like the film is sort of aware that the things that they're doing are terrible. But it still probably does want you to root for them in a way. And you know like the way you might root for like an anti-hero or something. And I kind of, I just thought that was like an interesting direction to take it. Even though I probably agree that it could be that kind of why they do bad things and you know what does that mean. It could be strengthened a little bit so that you actually feel the consequences of those actions. I know I get what you mean that it's like quite treated in quite a light way. But I was kind of happy that it kind of messed around with the genre a bit and made those protagonists kind of thorny and tricky. No I get that it's subvert in the genre and those are the bits I actually like those parts. But just the tone still felt like a Netflix rom-com for me. Despite the characters not being the generic good or bad they're a bit more curious or. Yeah yeah and I felt it was quite middle road the way they played it. I guess there's like two ways to frame that and that's like the two lanes that we're occupying here. It's like on one hand having characters do the things that the characters do in this film and behave in a certain way whilst maintaining a kind of moderate tone is quite jarring. But on the other hand I felt like that was kind of a deliberate choice and I kind of enjoyed that. Like I felt like the director was going okay we're going to do this rom-com but we're going to have all this fucked up shit in it and there's going to be a fun contrast between the rom-com tone and really difficult characters and that's going to be the thing that this film is doing that's different. And to me that was like a good thing but I could completely see someone watching it being like why is the film behaving as if it doesn't care that these things are happening and why is it so like you know agnostic or something. It's a weird mixed bag of a film in that way. I think outside of all that though I think it's obviously a very competently made film. I have a few sort of quibbles with it here or there but it's very much a proper film. It feels like a real film. Some of these sort of straights and Netflix or I know that Straights of Prime Roadhouse is really what comes to mind. This feels like a real film. Right. It's not just saying that was like past not just fill up their library or put something on the front cover. Yeah and it's not like yeah and Roadhouse is like a good comp because that's like a good director making a streaming film. And this is also a good director making a streaming film but it does feel like he has invested ideas and has actually like thought about it. You know whether you like it or not it does feel like there is a kind of there is a thesis there he is like trying to do something. It is a very tight screenplay and all those things where it is saying things like his whole philosophy lessons about sort of the id and the ego about you being able to change your personality at any point or adopt a new one or what really is a personality is it like an illusion or just like this whole made up thing anyway. That's an ultra slippification of it and they go into all sorts of different things but there is some depth to it. Yeah yeah just enough like not not too much to where it's like the film sort of forgets that it's a B movie. But I felt like those scenes that you're talking about where they kind of go into those where like two characters are talking about psychology and then it's very obviously mirroring the events that happening in the film could have come across way more annoying than they actually did in the film and I actually enjoyed that there was that element to it because it kind of it made it stand out a little bit more. It elevated it slightly above you know similar films to it and then it gives it an analysis of itself. Exactly and that's what also leads me to think of what kind of brings it around to my previous point about like it knows when the characters are doing those horrible things and they're still like a very light tone. The film is aware of it because they are the characters are constantly talking about like identity and how you could completely change you know if you were in love with someone and that could change your personality without you knowing. So it does feel like they are like having that conversation and what I also think works is the romance element I felt like the two so it's Glenn Powell who's like one of the kind of rising stars in Hollywood currently. He and Andrea are at a hona or Jonah have really good chemistry I thought and it is funny because this year seems to be like the year of the erotic romance or the erotic thriller that kind of bringing back like sexy leads that that kind of have chemistry or like an attempt to make sexy films. And I felt like the two leads did have quite a lot of chemistry and a lot of the kind of the plot points that happen rely on you believing that you know they would do and crazy things for each other. And I think you do buy that and I think that's part of that's a big part of why the film worked for me. I don't know what you feel. I didn't mind I didn't have any issues with their character transformations and that is a big part of it. They do have big character arcs but I don't feel like I felt there was enough romance in this film and I think that would be one of the key selling points. I don't think it sells enough to be a comedy to recommend it for its comedy element. I personally didn't find the film very funny. I would say it was just goofy rather. Yeah. But I think it goes for more sexy than romantic. Sure. But there was kind of just like a section in the middle of the film where it goes and then they fuck and then there's all of that. But I didn't find it. Yeah. Again, I didn't find it romantic or sexy. There certainly isn't the next the challenges or you know something a bit more warm and cozy and romantic. It didn't click either fully for me. But I do think Glenn and Adriana do have enough chemistry. Perhaps there just wasn't enough breathing room for scenes of them being romantic other than them perhaps connecting over the idea of mammals as pets and that sort of thing. There was also this is quite a separate point. So the way it dealt with the domestic abuse I found slightly curious in this. How so? Well, originally she's hiring him to take out her husband who's being abusive. But I suppose this is perhaps the gaslighting bit. You never know how much of what she's saying is the truth. And it makes it very clear that she's unreliable at certain points of the film. And anyhow, Glenn Powell's character or Gary talks her out of it or I suppose he's run in that moment if we're to go through the whole double identity thing. Sure. And then she just leaves the husband and then instantly has this new happy life. Which I felt like it was a bit of an oversimplification of the matter. Yeah, potentially. I mean, well, she doesn't just leave. I mean, we could be getting in spoiler territory, but she doesn't. Yeah. She doesn't just leave him. I think that the fact of her unreliability becomes, again, becomes a plot point that the film is aware of and becomes like one of the twists. So I do think that there is more there to that in the your, I felt encourages an audience member to distrust her. Yeah. Like I was saying before, I felt like their chemistry was strong enough. And maybe it's not romantic, but at least you get a sense of strong desire between the two leads. And I believed that even when she is behaving in an extremely dodgy way, he would still vouch for her. And I think that's kind of the most important thing about the sort of latter part of the film is you have to buy that. And I did. And so it worked for me on that level. I really liked the there's a character who is kind of the hitman who preceded or the fake hitman who preceded Glen Powell's character, Gary. And he's kind of the like, I agree with you that the film isn't quite funny enough to be recommendable just as a comedy. And I agree with that. But the foil who is the hitman who proceeds Glen Powell kind of comes back and he becomes like this kind of villainous character who's like constantly wanting Glen Powell to fuck up so that he can have his job back. And I thought that character was funny. And I really liked the actor who plays him. And I can't remember his name. That's Austin Amelio. Austin Amelio. Yeah. I thought that some of the best comedy was him behaving in a kind of nasty way, but in a very knowing way in that kind of dynamic. I thought it was really funny. There are some twists and turns in this. And I think at the end of the film, it gets a bit more interesting. But I think this is kind of typical of the rom-con genre. I think you're always a couple steps ahead of the screenplay on this one. Or at least I felt like I was able to foresee scenes before they were happening. OK, really. I winced a couple times throughout this film, and I found it a little bit cringe. And I think it was slightly to do with that. And I found it a little bit difficult seeing Glen Powell's character constantly trying on different costumes, makeup, and putting on these funny accents for these bizarre characters that are supposed to be the fantasies of people's hitman that he's sort of fulfilling in order to catch them out. So I found the film cringe at times, although perhaps that's my own issues with watching this brand. Again, I can kind of agree that it is cartoonish and goofy. But that just didn't bother me. And I feel like part of the intrigue for me or why it didn't bother me was because it was an interesting point that the film was making. That hitman in the way that you see in films don't actually exist. Therefore, it is quite interesting to see someone play these goofy characters and for people to still believe that they are a legitimate hitman. And I felt that that was kind of illuminating and new and interesting. I just hadn't occurred to me that these situations don't actually happen in the way that you see in films. And I guess also it's kind of reinforced by the fact that Gary Johnson was like a real person and did actually do this to some extent. So I think it's very, very, very loosely based on his story. Very, very loosely. However, the core kind of idea of the fake hitman part, that element of it is true. I believe. So that was, I was kind of happy for it to be a slightly goofy. Yeah, I don't know. I had some fun with it. While it's light and friendly, that's how it goes. Yeah, yeah. It's casual viewing all over. Exactly, yeah. But not a casually made film. It feels like proper and heartfelt. Right, yeah. Yeah, no, I'd agree with that. And it's also interesting that Glen Powell co-wrote the screenplay with Richard Linklater. I know he said we wouldn't go too much into his career, but it's quite a... He doesn't seem like the kind of movie star who would be a writer. He's kind of occupied that sort of Brad Pitt role of handsome leading man who's really famous and is going to be in really big stuff. And for him to be writing alongside people like Richard Linklater very early on in his career, it's just kind of like an interesting kind of quirk that I was... And I thought, like you said, we have some issues with it, but it's quite a tight screenplay in a lot of ways and quite interesting. And so, yeah, I thought that was cool as well. Yeah, speaking of Glen Powell's of being the new Brad Pitt-esque actor, I found the beginning "spitch" of him supposed to be this like fucking loser nerd, which they're presenting him as. I think that fell a little bit short, and I think that there wasn't quite enough space given to the introduction to his character or the establishment of his character. They quite easily go to present Gary as just being this very boring individual. We only get like one minute of it before he's sort of thrown into the world of being this undercover hitman persona actor, because before he's just sort of the technical guy or he listens in as this other fella, like you were saying, that precedes him, does the face-to-face acting. So we see him transition into that role, but we only have a slight introduction to him as Gary before that. I guess maybe that's fitting, so he suddenly jumps into this world and you're equally caught off guard. But like the examples of him being lame, I felt a bit weird, because everyone's like, "Oh, this guy's a fucking loser." And is it just because he wears like open-toed shoes or at the start, he's like, "You probably think I live a very boring, simple life, because I keep cats and feed the birds." You know, feeding the birds is a very fucking small thing. That's like saying, "I own a dog and mow the lawn." That's just something you do in your garden. You could say that he's a very avid bird spotter, or I think saying like a bit more niche, but feeding the birds? That's like watering houseplants. Yeah, I completely agree with that. Where they're in the car with the other people that do the undercover operations. And then they, because he makes this weirdly specific reference to a bayou, they're saying, "Does your family have a place in the bayou? Was that a true story?" And he goes, "Oh no, but I have been to the bayou." And I saw these two woodpeckers that time, and it was really good. And then they look at each other like, "Oh my God, this guy's completely insufferable. Should we get some air in here as if to drown him out?" And then when he leaves the car, they look at each other and they're like, "Did he know he was being funny, or is he that much of an arsehole?" It's like, "What the fuck?" You mentioned seeing two woodpeckers. Like, I myself am into birds, but to an extent. But I think even if you-- Were you offended by the shots at bird spotters? But yeah, it was like the lamest thing. It wasn't like he went on this long, rambling story that was completely inaccessible. Imagine he saw two woodpeckers. That's quite decent. I think even someone that hated birds would think that was a cool sight. Yeah, I mean, I completely agree with you. And I think it's-- Yeah, that's a downside of the film that I did. I do remember thinking about as I was watching it, which was-- It would be much more interesting for a-- For like, not Glenn Powell to be that character in some ways. Because the transformation from, you know, quote unquote, lame person into cool hitman would be much more interesting if you believed that the person was lame or in the first place. Like, I don't know, just having a guy who actually does seem normal, like just your average Joe, who is then transformed and made into this kind of like sexy, hunky guy. That would be more interesting than having a guy who's already sexy and hunky and pretending like he's not that for like a really long time. And then when he finally is that, it's like, "Oh my God, look at this." And it's like, but I do remember-- It seems like he's socially competent guy who's absolutely ripped, but happens to feed the birds. And as an audience member, you're just like, "Well, yeah, I knew that. It's not." When the transformation happened, you're like, "Yeah, whatever." It's kind of-- Maybe it needed like a kind of Barry, Cohen, that thing in Saltburn where he's like, "He is genuinely weird and you kind of think, "Oh, okay." And then by the end, you're like, "Yeah, okay." Maybe he's kind of portrayed in a cool way. That kind of transformation maybe would have been more interesting. And then, yeah, I agree with you that the way in which they-- Separate to just him being a handsome guy who obviously isn't lame and obviously is cool is weird the way in which they try and tell the audience that he isn't cool because, yeah, it felt very like high school bully kind of dialogue. Yeah, he feeds the birds. Oh, man. You know, what a jerk. Like, it's that kind of thing. And yeah, that's probably quite weak writing. So I definitely agree with you on that one. But I would say that it was-- So the Gary character is sort of weak in that sense. But then I did enjoy seeing the other hit men characters that he creates even though they are goofy. It was kind of like, yeah, I did find that interesting. Especially because he's doing it purely as a study. And there is something kind of fucked up about that. And then that becomes the kind of the floor or the kind of the thing that's thorny about his characters. That he is actually doing this out of choice and purely out of interest and is happy to like engage in this incredibly destructive behavior purely because he wants to see, you know, just the idea that the whole fundamental core of why he's doing it is just for like psychological experimentation. I found that very interesting and therefore I was down with all the other hit men characters. But yeah, the thing about Gary is true. And the whole element of it, he's taken it so far, it's kind of more entrapment than anything is a bit of an element that they do actually get into. Yeah. You mentioned that earlier. And I think that might have been the highlight of the film for me. There's a bit that sort of jumps out fairly early on where it talks about how hit men are essentially not a real thing. Right. Yeah, but it's something that's so popular in pop culture that it's invaded all of our sort of imaginations and all that bit. And then he's filling in their fantasies and everyone has like this idea of what they want their hit man to be. And then he'll sort of dress up as this almost caricature of this idea for each person and then it's successful for them. And that's primarily where the comedy comes from. And I think that does work and I don't have any disagreements with that. Yeah. And it, because it's like a satirical point, I think that's why I was okay with it being so goofy because I kind of, I was very downward like what it was saying about America that I was, I forgave it for, you know, when he's like in that stupid wig and he's doing the British accent, I thought, yeah, okay. Funny because the guy hiring him is thinking like, whoa, this is so like, it's the contrast between the people hiring him being like in awe of him and the fact that his actual persona being completely ridiculous and not believable at all, I thought that was like a funny but also just it tells you, it's a good way of telling the audience what the film is actually trying to say about, you know, American culture and how so much of it is like a fabrication, a complete lie. You know, and I thought, yeah, it's just a cool thing that distinguishes it from, you know, just another hitman film, you know what I mean? Like it is, what's the word? It's certainly not another hitman film. It's deconstructive. It's not an assassin film. Yeah, deconstructive. A commentary on a hitman assay creation of cinema. Right, exactly. Literature, I guess. Yeah. But who reads? But who reads, but who reads? It's insufferable nerds like Gary. The same fuckers that probably saw woodpeckers and would tell you about it. Yeah, and I think the supporting characters is also another weakness of the film and probably the part of the film I like the least in terms of like the early part where it feels more overtly comedic and there's just like, there's a lot of tropes that, and again, it's like that's kind of what the film is doing. Like it's a commentary on genre, so the characters aren't really characters. The story isn't really like a proper story. It's just a way of like analyzing American culture and this particular American genre. But the characters at the beginning who are like very much the sidekick characters who are like constantly offering comedic commentary on what's going on. All of that stuff is quite cringe. And a lot of the dialogue that we are referring to is kind of like, yeah, okay. Right. But thankfully there isn't, that does eventually die out. And then it becomes a different thing. Should we wrap this up? I think it's time. Enough of this small talk. Let's hit them. Amara. Do you recommend Hitman? I do recommend Hitman. I think that it's kind of, you know, it's a smart film disguised as a dumb film and it has elements of both. And I'm always intrigued when kind of highbrow directors engage with slightly lowerbrow genres. And I find that kind of an interesting mixture. And I think the leads have really good chemistry. And I think it works on different levels. I think it's probably kind of a good erotic thriller at times. And then it's also a good kind of deconstructive commentary on the Hitman genre at other times. And I think it's good. It's got quite a few things working for it. Even though it's certainly not the finished article, it's certainly not perfect. But I would recommend people see it for sure. Because I think it's an interesting addition to Richard Linklater's filmography. What do you think, Frank? I'm not sure I necessarily recommend people view it. I think it's a good casual viewing film with a bit of depth. Very accessible. I think it does quite a lot of self-analyzing of its themes. But I think that's actually a pro for it. I don't think it's a very narrow, vapid film that you would typically get with the Netflix rom-coms. Sorry to slag off that genre. I don't think the comedy or the romance worked for me. But it was such a light, easy film. And I think it did have good pacing. That it was an enjoyable enough watch. So no real qualms there. I think it's a very competent film. I think all the actors were well casted. And it all looks well or looks good. It's very tight screen play. So I suppose a very light recommendation. I suppose it'll be a bit different if I saw this in cinema. I wouldn't really recommend you see it in cinema. But that's not what it is. It's a Netflix film. So there's a whole different thing. So take what you want from that. So I suppose it's not a dis-recommendation, but I suppose it's a dis-recommendation. But I'm not saying it's a bad film. What a messy conclusion. The inconclusive if I may say so. And it's going to go against our outro. But thank you for listening. This has been Frank about film, the film show, where we refuse to beat about the bush. But sometimes we do just a little bit. Just a little bit. [Music] Owning a rental property sounds like a dream until you realize how much work goes into getting it ready. Determine a competitive rent price, market the property, schedule the showing screen, turn off the lease at a rent collection, handle maintenance, request maintenance and communication. Whew, sound complicated? Renters' warehouse is here to take the hard work off your rental to-do list. Qualify tenants, check. Rent collection, check. Maintenance coordination, you got it. Go to runnerswherehouse.com for a free rental analysis to find out how much your home can rent for. Or call 303-974-9444. Because from now on, the only thing you need on your to-do list is to call runners' warehouse. You slept through your alarm, missed the train, and your breakfast sandwich. Ugh. Cold. Sounds like you could use some luck. I'm Victoria Cash, and Lucky Land is where people go every day to get lucky. At Lucky Land, you can play over a hundred casino-style games for free for your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Go to LuckyLandslots.com and get lucky today. No purchase necessary. VGW Group, void we're prohibited by law. 18-plus, terms and conditions apply.