"Just Getting Started" seems like some sort of sardonic reply to a question about how the screenplay is progressing. Unfortunately, the movie has already been filmed, edited and released without the major re-write needed to convert it into a truly enjoyable cinematic experience.
It lacks a protagonist, a hero. If one accepts the view that the hero is the character who undergoes the most emotional growth during the film, that role would probably be that of Rene Russo's Suzie. If one considers the protagonist to be the central character, it would be Morgan Freeman's Duke. If one argues that the hero is the character that the audience roots for and hopes to achieve his goals, it would probably be Tommy Lee Jones's Leo.
It also lacks a villain. Suzie seems as if she might be a villain or antagonist, but turns out to be more of what is called a contagonist in Dramatica theory. Leo seems like an antagonist, but is more of a sidekick or co-protagonist in a buddy film and eventually evolves into a guardian. Jane Seymour plays the aptly yclept Delilah, the shrewish wife of an imprisoned gangster who dispatches an unidentified assassin to murder Duke in an opening scene, but the assassin is too inept to pose a realistic threat and hardly a match for a pair of septuagenarians.
To compensate for this lack of clearly-defined central characters, the movie offers two trios of supporting characters in three sidekicks and three love interests.
The movie was written and directed by Ron Shelton who, back in the nineties, wrote and directed a string of comedies I've never seen or only vaguely remember, including "Bull Durham" and "Tin Cup," and wrote a couple of films I have seen, "Bad Boys II" and "The Great White Hype." TGWH was amusing, until it simply ended with a sort of deus ex machina turn of events that ran counter to the direction the narrative seemed to pursue. JGS suffers from the same malaise. It doesn't go anywhere. There is no recognizable moral or theme, no character arcs. Anybody, like myself, who likes a traditional storyline, with a sympathetic hero who must acquire new knowledge, skills, friends, or whatever, to overcome a seemingly insurmountable challenge or obstacle, will likely be disappointed.
JGS is one of the least amusing comedies I've seen in a long while. The idea of Morgan Freeman as an aging Lothario juggling the attentions of three oversexed senior citizens has potential, but falls flat in execution. A seminar on group sex for senior citizens could have been milked mercilessly, but is reduced to a one-liner. The conflict between the conflict between a roguish but likeable manager with his fingers in the till confronting a straight-laced, authoritarian efficiency expert seems like fertile grounds left fallow. The rivalry between two septuagenarians for a lady's affection might have been much funnier, if the Suzie were played by a much younger actress, perhaps in her late thirties, rather than an actress in her sixties, possibly with additional competition from a much younger suitor. Instead, they went for a politically-correct age-appropriate relationship and basically disqualified one of the suitors for unrelated reasons.
Production values are adequate and the actors do as well as can be expected with the material they were provided, but the script wasn't ready for production.
It lacks a protagonist, a hero. If one accepts the view that the hero is the character who undergoes the most emotional growth during the film, that role would probably be that of Rene Russo's Suzie. If one considers the protagonist to be the central character, it would be Morgan Freeman's Duke. If one argues that the hero is the character that the audience roots for and hopes to achieve his goals, it would probably be Tommy Lee Jones's Leo.
It also lacks a villain. Suzie seems as if she might be a villain or antagonist, but turns out to be more of what is called a contagonist in Dramatica theory. Leo seems like an antagonist, but is more of a sidekick or co-protagonist in a buddy film and eventually evolves into a guardian. Jane Seymour plays the aptly yclept Delilah, the shrewish wife of an imprisoned gangster who dispatches an unidentified assassin to murder Duke in an opening scene, but the assassin is too inept to pose a realistic threat and hardly a match for a pair of septuagenarians.
To compensate for this lack of clearly-defined central characters, the movie offers two trios of supporting characters in three sidekicks and three love interests.
The movie was written and directed by Ron Shelton who, back in the nineties, wrote and directed a string of comedies I've never seen or only vaguely remember, including "Bull Durham" and "Tin Cup," and wrote a couple of films I have seen, "Bad Boys II" and "The Great White Hype." TGWH was amusing, until it simply ended with a sort of deus ex machina turn of events that ran counter to the direction the narrative seemed to pursue. JGS suffers from the same malaise. It doesn't go anywhere. There is no recognizable moral or theme, no character arcs. Anybody, like myself, who likes a traditional storyline, with a sympathetic hero who must acquire new knowledge, skills, friends, or whatever, to overcome a seemingly insurmountable challenge or obstacle, will likely be disappointed.
JGS is one of the least amusing comedies I've seen in a long while. The idea of Morgan Freeman as an aging Lothario juggling the attentions of three oversexed senior citizens has potential, but falls flat in execution. A seminar on group sex for senior citizens could have been milked mercilessly, but is reduced to a one-liner. The conflict between the conflict between a roguish but likeable manager with his fingers in the till confronting a straight-laced, authoritarian efficiency expert seems like fertile grounds left fallow. The rivalry between two septuagenarians for a lady's affection might have been much funnier, if the Suzie were played by a much younger actress, perhaps in her late thirties, rather than an actress in her sixties, possibly with additional competition from a much younger suitor. Instead, they went for a politically-correct age-appropriate relationship and basically disqualified one of the suitors for unrelated reasons.
Production values are adequate and the actors do as well as can be expected with the material they were provided, but the script wasn't ready for production.