I’m going to spend about as much time thinking about the new movie The Hustle as the screenwriters, producers, and everyone else with the project did: not much.
I’ll admit, I was skeptical about The Hustle (which is essentially a remake of Dirty Rotten Scoundrels) from the get go.
The film is billed as follows:
“In the hilarious new comedy THE HUSTLE, Anne Hathaway and Rebel Wilson star as female scam artists, one low rent and the other high class, who team up to take down the dirty rotten men who have wronged them.”
First, I’m going to let you guess -- between Hathaway and Wilson – which one is “low rent” and which is “high class.” If you guessed Wilson is the high class scammer then congratulations – you’re not as pessimistic about Hollywood’s treatment of “unconventional” women as I am. No, Wilson is the “low rent” chubby girl whose whole M.O. is to steal money from men who don’t find her attractive. The slender Hathaway is a dignified British woman with links to the royal family who speaks many languages, struts constantly, and has men falling for her left and right. Color me shocked.
Next, the description identifies Wilson and Hathaway as “female scam artists.” (WHAT?! BRUH! ARE YOU TELLING ME WOMEN CAN BE CON ARTISTS, TOO?! MIND BLOWN!) The qualifier clearly bothered me. For a movie that seemingly wants to be about women’s empowerment (I think?!?!) having to clarify that, yes – women can lie, and manipulate, and cheat just as easily as men can (maybe better) – seems completely tone deaf. (Lest we forget the age-old story of Eve getting poor innocent, rib-sharing Adam kicked out of the Garden of Eden for convincing him to eat the forbidden fruit… but I digress.)
The movie tries (and fails) to make a bigger point about gender roles. Hathaway’s character at one point gives a speech to Wilson, explaining that women make for successful con artists precisely because they are so frequently underestimated by men, but that’s pretty much where the film’s girl power moments begin and end. Throughout most of the film the women are in constant competition with each other. Even the premise of the one scheme where they do work together (which is about as bizarre to watch as a crashing SNL sketch) is centered around the idea that Hathaway’s character is desirable and Wilson’s is abhorrent. Could we not do better, writers?
Both Hathaway and Wilson deliver good performances. Wilson’s comic talents are hard to shine block, and Hathaway’s acting range is on full display as she rotates through a carousel of different accents and emotions in service of her various schemes. But it’s everything around them – from the marketing of the film, to the writing and directing – that sank it. Maybe there’s an alternate timeline where everything comes together and this movie works, but I’m not in it.
--Kelsey Robinson
I’ll admit, I was skeptical about The Hustle (which is essentially a remake of Dirty Rotten Scoundrels) from the get go.
The film is billed as follows:
“In the hilarious new comedy THE HUSTLE, Anne Hathaway and Rebel Wilson star as female scam artists, one low rent and the other high class, who team up to take down the dirty rotten men who have wronged them.”
First, I’m going to let you guess -- between Hathaway and Wilson – which one is “low rent” and which is “high class.” If you guessed Wilson is the high class scammer then congratulations – you’re not as pessimistic about Hollywood’s treatment of “unconventional” women as I am. No, Wilson is the “low rent” chubby girl whose whole M.O. is to steal money from men who don’t find her attractive. The slender Hathaway is a dignified British woman with links to the royal family who speaks many languages, struts constantly, and has men falling for her left and right. Color me shocked.
Next, the description identifies Wilson and Hathaway as “female scam artists.” (WHAT?! BRUH! ARE YOU TELLING ME WOMEN CAN BE CON ARTISTS, TOO?! MIND BLOWN!) The qualifier clearly bothered me. For a movie that seemingly wants to be about women’s empowerment (I think?!?!) having to clarify that, yes – women can lie, and manipulate, and cheat just as easily as men can (maybe better) – seems completely tone deaf. (Lest we forget the age-old story of Eve getting poor innocent, rib-sharing Adam kicked out of the Garden of Eden for convincing him to eat the forbidden fruit… but I digress.)
The movie tries (and fails) to make a bigger point about gender roles. Hathaway’s character at one point gives a speech to Wilson, explaining that women make for successful con artists precisely because they are so frequently underestimated by men, but that’s pretty much where the film’s girl power moments begin and end. Throughout most of the film the women are in constant competition with each other. Even the premise of the one scheme where they do work together (which is about as bizarre to watch as a crashing SNL sketch) is centered around the idea that Hathaway’s character is desirable and Wilson’s is abhorrent. Could we not do better, writers?
Both Hathaway and Wilson deliver good performances. Wilson’s comic talents are hard to shine block, and Hathaway’s acting range is on full display as she rotates through a carousel of different accents and emotions in service of her various schemes. But it’s everything around them – from the marketing of the film, to the writing and directing – that sank it. Maybe there’s an alternate timeline where everything comes together and this movie works, but I’m not in it.
--Kelsey Robinson
RSS Feed
