Glen Powell has a certain charm with his capybara smile and successful blockbusters. That being said, I’m getting tired of seeing Glen Powell play himself in every film he’s in. His newest is, unfortunately, no exception to this white-bread typecast. Although a dynamic mystery, “How to Make a Killing” can’t decide which genre it is, only serving as another addition to the ever-growing list of boring, eat-the-rich thrillers.
“How to Make a Killing” introduces the dysfunctionally and unattainably wealthy Redfellow family. Becket Redfellow (Powell) has been disowned since birth, but his mother made Becket promise her that he would one day inherit the Redfellow fortune. Later, Becket’s childhood crush (Margaret Qualley) draws him back to that promise. With seven relatives in line for the wealth before him, Becket is torn between moving upward no matter what or learning to accept what he’s got.
It’s my second nature to attempt to figure out the twist of a film as I watch it, so it’s an important test to see if one can surprise me. “How to Make A Killing” struck a good balance in that regard. It has a really enjoyable blend of call-backs, easily solved clues and surprises that came out of left field. There were times when the film really shone as a thriller. That being said, those moments were outweighed by the tedium of trying to figure itself out.
The film is billed as a comedy-drama-thriller. There was some comedy, some drama, but not enough of either to satisfy. I found that a lot of the jokes in the film fell flat. Some elicited a laugh from the theater, but most were shoe-horned in. There were so many jokes that comedy would definitely be the film’s top descriptor. However, that only cheapened the more dramatic moments and made it impossible to connect with any of the main characters.
On top of that, there are so many absurd elements in this movie. Becket carries around a locket containing a piece of his mother’s hair that makes too many appearances. The audio of his mother making Becket promise to get the fortune is overplayed. This repetition makes the film feel like it’s being written for an audience on their phones rather than to be interesting enough to capture people’s attention.
“How to Make a Killing” is clearly speaking against the ultra-wealthy, depicting them as villains and not something to aspire to, but it doesn’t dig deeper into what that means. This pseudo-political, anti-rich style has become incredibly en vogue as of late. Movies like “The Menu,” “Blink Twice” and many others feature the same surface-level commentary about the top 1 percent, but none of them examine the system further or hold up to in-depth examination. The critique, then, is an attempt to prop up boring plots with moral commentary.
With the rise of wannabe anti-capitalist films, it doesn’t seem worth it to me to spend your hard-earned money to view a film that doesn’t know what message it’s sending. If you’re still looking for that vibe, “No Other Choice” and “Sorry to Bother You” are films that actually dive deeper into what makes the eat-the-rich genre such a captivating idea. There are more thought-provoking — and most importantly, more interesting — films that accomplish what “How to Make a Killing” couldn’t, so I’d watch those instead.
