On the Rocks (2020)
I thought about writing a long piece about this but I've got other writing I'm working on now plus one day I will be rewatching all of Sophia Coppola's films.
After hearing people say how underwhelming this is, I was surprised how much I enjoyed this. Certainly liked it more than The Bling Ring and Somewhere. Is it as good as The Beguiled, Lost in Translation, Marie Antoinette or The Virgin Suicides? Probably not, but I think we put unrealistic standards on lauded directors to make great films every time. Sometimes it's enough to make an interesting film, and this film is interesting.
To me, what makes this movie work is that it's so clearly about conveying the various elements of being a woman: a wife, a mother, a daughter, a professional, and a cook just to name a handful come into play as we follow the life of Laura (Rashida Jones), an upper-class New York City mom. But she also has that dread that she's no longer sexually desirable to her husband and he might be having an affair. Exacerbating this is her womanizing father, Felix (Bill Murray), who is almost certain that this is the case and gets her to progressively do more and more ridiculous things to find out if her husband is having an affair.
This sounds like the setup to the typical three act structure and that there would be some tense, dramatic moments but most of the film is simply Rashida Jones and Bill Murray talking through their past, the nature of relationships between men and women, and trying to figure out if there's such a thing as a faithful man.
I thought that was an interesting idea for a movie. The core relationship is interesting because Laura thinks her father is a pig and Felix probably thinks he's doing her a favor but doesn't realize how much of a toxic force he is in her life. I think a lesser writer/director would make this relationship more dramatic or tense but they bicker with each other much like parents and children do when they are adults, the parents still feeling like they're imparting wisdom the child doesn't know and the child frustrated at how much the parent fails to see his/her own hypocrisies and flaws and how that informs who they (the child) are and their insecurities.
That's all good stuff. Yes, the film is slow and understated, but I think that's been the case for a lot of Sophia Coppola's films. I take umbrage at the sentiment of critics and people on the Internet who dismiss this as a rich people film about rich people problems. If you can't see the common human element in the parent child relationship here that transcends class and race I think you've got a distinct lack of empathy.
Also Sophia Coppola grew up with a father who was one of the most creatively lauded people at the time. I think she has a right to tell these kids of stories and I never felt like she asked us to pity these characters or show how they have awful lives. They get to do lots of great things but that does not mean they are happy, and that's an important distinction to make. There's totally a scene where Laura calls out Felix's privilege so I think Sophia is extremely aware of how these characters fit into society. That doesn't mean we can't connect with them as characters or finding an hour and a half in their shoes fascinating.