The Nice Guys
This is another movie that falls into the “how did I miss this one?” category. I remember when it came out, seeing the trailer, and thinking “I’m going to enjoy that movie.”
And then 4 years went by.
Which isn’t actually that long – for some reason, I thought this came out much longer ago.
Also, for some reason, I kept conflating this movie with “The Other Guys” (Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg buddy cop movie). Obviously, these two movies are very different, but their damn names…
I thought for some reason they came out at a similar time, but they DID NOT. “The Other Guys” came out in 2010, while “The Nice Guys” was 2016. It appears that the name alone has had me confused for years and probably resulted in me waiting way to long to see this movie.
I do remember thinking “Nice Guys” would probably be better than “Other Guys”, but it was one of those times where a movie doesn’t seem to hit the zeitgeist and therefore you don’t prioritize watching it.
By the way, I have seen “The Other Guys” – not recently but I remember thinking it was a pretty funny Ferrell vehicle but still didn’t manage to live up to the (my own) hype. Probably worth a watch if you like Will Ferrell and haven’t seen it yet.
So, going into this, I genuinely wasn’t sure how it would differentiate from another comedic buddy cop movie with a similar name. It took almost no time for me to understand that this, in no way, was going to be a problem.
SPOILER ZONE
Right off the bat, I love the retro feel of this movie. We are mixing tones and genres all over the place – I am here for it.
We get some funky music to set the time and place and give us a sense of the tone. Plus, I’m pretty much obsessed with the font used in the opening of the movie. I guess I’m a sucker for this time period, but I completely loved the retro feel.
We hear Russell Crowe provide some narration – as if we’re in a film noir. Except we’re in the late 70’s so there are vibrant colors everywhere. And a ton of violence.
The time period of this movie might seem like an inconsequential detail, but I actually think it’s a critical component to the tone of this film. And the tone of this film is no small feat. Somehow, we get a delicious balance of goofy comedic actions with real stakes and violence occurring simultaneously and harmoniously.
Why is the time period of the movie so critical to this tone? We are in the late 70’s. This is a fun time. So, we get enough references to a grittier, grounded, and more violent early 70’s, but are also still of the doorstep of the goofier, colorful, cartoonish early 80’s.
Truly, this movie could not take place at any other time and achieve the same tone.
Plus, we get a lot of fun background details from this time, and even a trip to a late 70’s comedy club! As a comedy nerd, this was fun. There were so many details included in the fabric of this film (like a billboard for Jaws 2), not only did it make it more fun to watch, but it completely grounded the characters in a world that felt real. And since the plot points get a little pulp-y, a little crazy, having the world feel more realistic added to the perfectly balanced tone of the film.
Speaking of that tone – there are some truly hilarious moments and some truly violent ones, often at the same time. I’ll discuss a few of my favorites here:
Jackson Healy (Crowe) goes to speak to Holland March (Gosling) at the bowling alley where Holly (Holland’s daughter – Holland Jr.??) is having her birthday party. Jackson confronts Holland in the bathroom. That toilet stall scene is one of the funniest sequences I’ve seen in any movie in a while, regardless of genre.
At the sex party, Holland becomes (hilariously) drunk and basically falls off a very tall balcony. But minutes later, Jackson still has to fight off the bad guy. I loved the hot tub fight scene because we’ve already seen some real violence at this point – without knowing the violence in this movie can get real, the action would have fallen flat.
Later, our two Nice Guys head to an airport hotel to find Amelia Kuttner (Margaret Qualley) – the girl they’ve been looking for. There’s some funny banter at the bar beforehand (definitely laughed out loud). They finally get up their nerve and head up the elevator – it’s the right thing to do. They are ready for action – only to have the doors open on extreme violence. Without a word, they back into the elevator again and leave. I absolutely loved the choice to just abandon a huge action scene that most of the previous act has been seemingly building to.
The comedy is truly funny and the action is truly violent. The brilliance of how this dichotomy is executed makes me think of In Bruges a bit. But, I’ll tell you this much, I never laughed out loud at In Bruge the way I did in this film.
In many ways, this film stands above others that play (or try to play) in a similar sandbox. We’ve seen films with protagonists who have a kid and we’ve seen those kids get into dangerous situations, but I truly don’t think we’ve seen an on-screen pairing like Holland and Holly before. I loved how ridiculously mature Holly is. But, she still has enough innocence and child-like behavior that I believe her as a character (like imaginary readings at the site of her old house, not wanting her father or Healy to kill anyone). I was concerned that I might find her presence contrived or annoying, but every step of the way, the film justified her presence, or even called it out when it seemed out of place. Holly added a fun wrinkle to what might otherwise be a more straightforward “dude” movie.
Trigger Warning: Fish Violence. I don’t know why, but I really really hate fish violence in films. A Fish Called Wanda is objectively a fantastic film. But I’ve seen it about 90% fewer times than I otherwise would have because the first time I saw it, I was a bit traumatized by the fish violence.
Is it because I just love fish so much? No. I don’t particularly even like fish. Here’s what I think it is: Most people (in the audience) don’t have an emotional connection to fish. So, if there is an occasion of Fish Violence, it’s usually not to pull any sort of emotion out of the audience. It’s usually just to illustrate the cruelty of the perpetrator, OR to illustrate how silly one of our protagonists is for caring about his fish. Plus, fish are so small and weak. They have no defenses. And, they are so dumb that they have no idea what’s going on. They have no affection for their owner, no proverbial “dog” in whatever fight is happening. They aren’t jumping to their owners’ aid. They are just in their tank, minding their own business, when they get yanked out and thrown through the air, never understanding what happened. It’s just sad.
Diving into the performances a bit… I absolutely love Russel Crowe’s voice in this. It’s so gritty and deep. It truly feels as if he’s been pulled out of a dark 40’s film noir and thrown into this kooky action movie.
Ryan Gosling sounds the same as he always does.
His always-the-same voice not withstanding – his performance in this movie is truly enjoyable. We get to see him stretch some comedic legs that don’t get to see the light of day very often. He’s getting beat up constantly, drunk a lot of the time, and ultimately just seems to be having a blast with his role. Put more simply – he was an absolute delight. More of this Ryan Gosling please!!
For being a top-billed name on this film, we do not get a lot of Matt Bomer! I kept watching the movie, wondering when we were going to see him. We truly don’t see him until basically the last 30 minutes of the movie! I almost wish I didn’t know he was in this so that his appearance as Johnny Boy would have been even more exciting. I do love him as a bad guy – he’s crazy in that quiet sort of way that is completely terrifying. I know right away this guy is capable of anything.
And if you didn’t know right away, then the fact that he’s threatening the two little girls within a few minutes of his first appearance should clue you in.
At this point, as I’ve mentioned, the movie has established that real violence is entirely possible. So, when Matt Bomer threatens the girls in the house, you feel the tension. Plus, he fully throws one of the girls out of the window. Crazy.
Bomer’s performance made we want to see more of Bad-Guy-Bomer! If the fact that I want to see each actor doing more of what they did in this film doesn’t count as a ringing endorsement, I don’t know what does.
Quick shout out to Margaret Qualley! You might know here from Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, and sure, she’s good in that. But I saw her first in Fosse/Verdon and her performance there shows far more of her talent than either Nice Guys or OUATIH. If you haven’t seen Fosse/Verdon yet PLEASE do check it out. Top notch performances, plus one of the best directed /edited shows of last year without a doubt. WATCH IT.
Back to this movie…
Do you know that feeling when you meet someone new, and they seem to be on the same page as you, the same sense of humor, the same level of weirdness, the same world view – and you can just tell you are going to be really good friends? That’s how I felt when I finished watching this movie.
It’s going to warrant a re-watch from me for sure.
The Bottom Line:
This is a quirky movie, and a ton of fun in my opinion. It’s great to see Crowe and Gosling together like this. But this is more than a fun time. This is a movie that knows what it is and leans into its quirks without fear. It makes bold choices unapologetically, but still keeps you grounded as an audience member. It’s not like any other movie I’ve seen, but still feels familiar. It’s hilarious, it’s fun, it’s more than a little tense at times. I missed out on this movie for years because I didn’t hear anyone saying “omg you HAVE to watch this”. So, let me tell you “OMG YOU HAVE TO WATCH THIS.” Absolutely would recommend.
