Geekscape Reviews: Good Neighbors
GOOD NEIGHBORS, GREAT ACTING.
Whether it’s just where you stay until you can afford a home with your spouse, your first place in the big city after graduating high school or college, or the home you reside in for the rest of your days, practically everyone spends at least some of their life in living in an apartment building. There’s absolutely nothing odd about this in our modern society. We accept it. It’s the norm.
But why? It’s actually a rather weird way to live when you think about it. Apartment buildings are places filled with people that surround each other completely and at all times of the day and night, yet are all too often complete strangers.
Do you keep to yourself and try to ignore the people you live next to, but not with? Do you get angry if one of them throws a blaring party they didn’t even invite you to? Do you actually try to get to know them, to change them from simply being “3B” or “The Cute Blonde – I don’t know her name” to Steve or Susan?
Even if you are friendly and personable, how well CAN you know the people who live behind your bedroom wall? They could be lying when you exchange stories as you check the mail and take out the garbage. They could have come from anywhere. Isn’t that a bit scary?
Good Neighbors, the latest release from Magnolia Pictures ( and which releases today), is a little film that’s playing on this common aspect of our daily lives. In fact the setup sort of feels as simple and mundane as it is unlikely: it’s about three neighbors in a Montreal apartment complex who actually make an effort to get to know one another.Whaaa? Canadians . . . being friendly?
Jay Baruchel at both his acting, and openly Canadian, best.
Victor (Jay Baruchel – She’s Out of My League) is the new guy, just moving in after an extended absence abroad. Louise (Emily Hampshire – Command and Conquer 4: Tiberium Twilight) is the young woman living with her lovable cats, but otherwise alone. Spencer (Scott Speedman – xXx: State of the Union) is the curmudgeonly one, still recovering from a tragic accident that cost him the use of his legs. They help each other, dine together; they bond over a long Canadian winter. Love blossoms, hijinks ensue, the landlady gossips about what’s going on between them along the odd, ambling journey they’re embarking upon together.
Sounds like a great lighthearted comedy. Except there’s been a rash of murders going on about town, and there’s a distinct possibility that the killer lives in their building. Oh, and then there’s the distinct possibility that one of these three may not have too much longer to live.
Sooo, it’s a thriller then? Or a mystery? Horror?
Certainly, something horrific MUST be happening out of frame here. Or maybe it’s mouth-holdingly mysterious?
In fact, Good Neighbors is quite the odd little film to classify, as it subverts most of the common elements found in the genres mentioned above. It has elements of mystery, but quickly resolves the common question of “Who is the killer?” by its halfway point. It definitely contains horror, but these moments are as sparse as they are jarring (and they are very jarring). There is a touch of the cat and mouse game that thrillers contain, but for the most part it’s actually a rather dry and ambling movie that paces itself as coldly as the snowy city it centers upon. It’s also quite funny at times, albeit in the darkest forms of some of the blackest comedies.
No, if it’s anything, Good Neighbors is more akin to a stage play. Partly because of the setting, as aside from maybe one or two other locations, the entire film resides within the trio’s apartments or the building itself. Mostly though, it’s because this film presents a fairly intimate portrait of its characters and relies on the excellence of the actors portraying them.
Seriously, if you’ve only seen these three in comedies or cheesy vampire action movies you’ll be ill prepared for the performances they turn in here. Baruchel takes the geeky, awkward persona that served his skinny frame well in previous comedic efforts, and transforms it into a picture of a horribly lonely, pathetic man with Victor, while never dipping into caricature or losing his charm entirely. Speedman too, does an upstanding job, ironic for a man bound to a chair. Spencer encapsulates barely bound frustration and egotism in a person who now just barely fits into society; a man trying to remember what it was like to behave normally.
Yes, my name is Speedman. No, I’m not a Mega Man boss. Defeating me will not grant you my patented “Speed Smirk”.
But the real wonder is Emily Hampshire. She’s got the toughest job, as Louise is the most understated character of the three; a detached woman who doesn’t want to make an effort with other people, far preferring her felines to human companionship. Often, such characters end up dull, but Hampshire gets plenty of mileage out her eyes alone, delivering cold glares that betray a cunning mind beneath. If you see this movie, you’re never going to look at your own local cat lady the same way again, that’s for sure.
These impeccable performances are especially important because the cast of characters (including most of the secondary ones) may be one of the least likable I’ve seen on screen in while. I mean, sure, we’re all kind of used to aloof dickheads in film or on television. Heck, that’s what the show House relies on. But here, we’re given a cringing sycophant, a mean spirited shut-in, and a girl so frigid it borders onto the territory of the White Witch of Narnia. This isn’t even mentioning their neighbor, who’s as much a bitch as she is French.
Oh and apparently this film is set in 1995, so no, this newspaper is not an anachronism.
Having such an off putting group of characters is precisely what the plot revolves around though. This ends up a story of, if not bad people doing bad things to each other, at least a bunch of genuinely awkward loners barely getting along. Oh, and eventually doing bad things to each other as their own suspicions and grudges get the better of them.
Such stories can often end up nearly unwatchable if not handled properly, no matter (heck, maybe even because of) how well the characters are portrayed. But writer/director (and fellow Are You Afraid of the Dark alumnus along with Baruchel) Jacob Teirney keeps everything together. His script grants these folks with realistic, though still interesting dialogue and his direction creates a film that while slow, never drags. Especially considering the range of genres the film straddles; it’s quite the neat feat.
Writer/Director Teirney seen here. Not trying to look cool, just very, very, cold.
Still, Good Neighbors may be something of a tough sell in a movie market that just got double punched by the end of a magical war, AND the superheroic end to a real one. It’s undoubtedly an excellent character piece, and certainly fascinating, but also the complete opposite of what you may be looking for as the summer moves towards its end.
Of course, that’s also its appeal. If you’re like me, and want to ingest something a bit more provocative, a bit cynical, and definitely a bit colder, then Good Neighbors and its group of unfriendly friends may be your perfect cup of iced coffee.
I certainly enjoyed the wry look at these folks who barely getting to know each other learning that maybe they would have been better off if they hadn’t. If you’re willing to take a walk on the darker side of Canadian life, you will too. Certainly, it’s given me something to think about in regards to my apartment complex. I’m not sure if I want to get to know the lady in apartment 201 or the Caribbean immigrants next to me that well, but after this flick, it might not be a bad idea to try and get on their good side.
Maybe I’ll bring them some cookies.
