Bradley Cooper’s third directorial effort marks a significant departure from the operatic sweep of “A Star Is Born” and “Maestro,” trading biographical grandeur for intimate character study while maintaining his signature visual intensity.
“Is This Thing On?” premiered on the closing night selection of the New York Film Festival, with Cooper racing to finalize post production on the film as told to critics at an LA screening by Searchlight publicists on the same night.
The film is inspired by British footballer-turned-comedian John Bishop and his personal journey into comedy. Written by Cooper, Will Arnett, and Mark Chappell, the film examines marital disintegration and a creative awakening of sorts from this father and unhappy husband.
Here’s a look at the trailer before we delve into the film’s flourishing moments and minor flaws.
After the extensive preparation and lengthy production of “Maestro,” Cooper dives in head-first with a more kinetic approach, taking to the streets of NYC with a camera strapped to himself as he follows star Will Arnett in his journey as Alex Novak.
The film exists in that same heightened-yet-naturalistic space where David O. Russell’s best films operate, though Cooper can’t quite reach the nuanced heights of his mentor’s best work because the framework is lacking on the page. Despite the script lacking the framework for a strong supporting cast and character arcs, the narrative stitching of Alex Novak’s life is quite a fascinating approach to telling his story of fledgling comic and father living in a new apartment and reorganizing his life.
Scenes connect with no sense of how many hours or days have elapsed between moments, and while this typically creates disjointed viewing experiences, it somehow works perfectly here, mirroring the shattered life of Alex Novak as he oscillates between life in a new apartment, being a present father for his kids, and exploring the avenue of self-expression and self-examination through stand up comedy relating to his separation with his longtime spouse.
The film drops the bombshell of marital breakdown with right off the bat, utilizing a rather innocuous line during a shared bathroom pre-bedtime routine. “I think we need to call it, right?” says Laura Dern’s Tess Novak at the sink.
Will Arnett’s Alex agrees with little to no emotion, which is not the strongest start to the film. However, the ensuing conversation if he should leave that night immediately connects emotionally with the audience as they feel the reality of the life-altering path this couple is on — and shortly thereafter we meet one of their two sons and the family dogs… this will not be a clean break.
The break up moment is followed by a planned dinner gathering with Alex and Tess’ couple friends — long-married couple Christine (Andra Day) and Balls (Bradley Cooper), soon-to-be empty nesters, and gay newlyweds Stephen (Sean Hayes) and Geoffrey (Hayes’ real-life husband Scott Icenogle).
It seems that Christine and Balls are surviving their lifeless relationship by around-the-clock THC use and Balls bumbles into the apartment with an apparent lack of awareness, spilling the milk he was sent to get. Cooper’s Balls was written primarily for comic relief, as the two-dimensional character has very few moments of cognitive clarity and mostly plays self-obsessed and aloof, using up far too much Oxygen explain his work as an understudy in a long running Biblical play currently off Broadway in NYC.
Tess Novak, who we later learn was a Team USA Olympic athlete in Volleyball, is only really seen as an unhappy mother (and cookie thief) in the first act of the film. Tess confronted Christine in her apartment in the hopes of getting one of her weed cookies. When Christine lies about baking them, Tess takes it upon herself to steal one and she hides it in her purse.
As Alex drops Tess at the train station, she eats the lion’s share of the cookie but gives Alex the remaining half. The script then jumps to Alex being stoned, struggling to adjust to the new reality of his life, and finding a bar with a cover charge… a fee that’s waived if you sign up to do an open mic comedy set in the basement of the venue.
Comedy isn’t Alex’s dream or profession, he has some nebulous finance job that’s never explored or shown to be an element on his journey within the film’s framework. It could be a source of added conflict in the Alex’s life, the fellas in the office chastising him for exploring a creative outlet. That particularly critism is handled by Alex’s parents in the film (played brilliantly by Christine Ebersoel and Ciran Hinds).
As he takes the stage downstairs, Alex is believably out-of-sorts at his first time at an open mic, but he settles into his own pacing and the rhythm and his honesty connects with the audience enough to get some laughs. He bares the pain of his current predicament on stage in a form of therapy, with the added validation from the audience’s applause and laughter.
Alex keeps coming back for future sessions, and Cooper’s direction brilliantly depicts how intoxicating even moderate crowd approval can be under the right circumstances. Alex is not chasing this full-time, in fact, he doesn’t really start preparing material and writing until a few sets are under his belt.
How he balances all the financial strain of a new apartment and a full-time job, it’s never really addressed in the film. I think it’s one of the few flaws in painting this rather beautifully depicted narrative surrounding Alex. Somehow this financial sector day job is the one thing in his life that remains stable, and provides him with the means to buy a pimped out van which he surprises his young sons with during one of Tess’ days of having the boys. Tess reacts with dismay, which feels like very conventional for plotting a two-dimensional wife (luckily her arc gets fleshed out mid second act).
Tess is written to be unnecessarily friction-filled with Alex’s attempts to keep the kids upbeat amid the big life changes they’re facing.
Tess battling a lack of satisfaction with her life following her departure from playing volleyball professionally. This is not just a sport that she once played at Olympic level — it was a way of life since her early school days that defined her self-value to an unhealthy extent. Midway through the film, she’s approached about coaching the sport.
A job interview turns into a semi-date that leads her and athlete-turned-actor Peyton Manning to an unplanned rendezvous with Alex at one of his comedy performances.
This is the most engaging sequence in the film and it sees Alex describing sex with a new woman post separation (this is uncomfortable news to Tess), and how it was somehow less enthralling than being with his wife that he knows so well in the intimate setting… he also jokes about his ineptitude to “mate” in a new culture and climate since he was last single.
That scene leads to the surprising renweed interest from Tess, who at first confronts him after he chases her down outside the comedy club — then she tells him it was “hot” to see him on stage and they go back to his place for makeup sex.
This portion of the script is where Dern shines, being so relatable and human in this moment and not knowing how to handle these mixed feelings about her ex. This is opposed to the miserable naysayer showcased earlier in the film (and regrettably that side of Tess reemerges later in the film).
Tess’ journey in the screenplay starts and ends poorly, with her personality hangups derailing the relationship twice in my opinion. Her coaching storyline and self-analysis are not interesting areas to explore, and the audience finds itself more interested in Alex’s comedy journey than the potential salvation of his dead marriage. You also wonder when the payoff will come for their sons guitar and keyboard practice sessions for Queen’s hit song, “Under Pressure.”
It comes at the end of the film with Alex and Tess back together, if feels a bit too forced following the renewed interest and then renewed petty squabbles between them (mostly because of how Tess is written in the script).
Despite being a clear two-hander for Arnett and Dern, the audience suddenly gets a glimpse of character depth and a potential arc for Andra Day’s Christine during their yearly pilgrimage to the coast in their friend group (the one plot beat set up during the first five minutes of the film that come to fruition).
Day gets to shine here as Christine corners Alex when they’re alone at the rental house. It’s an amazing scene where she and Alex come to terms with their friendship, her boldly stated attraction to him (which she would never act on), and her anger and misery because she sees herself in him. It’s a compelling thread that sadly isn’t further explored to a resolution or greater development of their friendship.
The movie also drops in random sequences where Alex and Balls interact (Cooper’s small supporting stoner character married to Christine), never building toward a real arc and it’s unclear what we’re supposed to take from his marital woes with Christine other than perhaps marriages are all meant to run out of steam?
The script needed another pass on the supporting roles and their own arcs in the film, or a heavy reduction of them and added focus on Alex’s relationship with his own parents. The struggles his parents faced (alluded to on stage during a comedy set) during Alex’s childhood would certainly inform a lot of what he’s feeling now in his own marriage.
Sean Hayes and real-life husband Scott Icenogle appear in less than four scenes, eating ice cream at night and an impromptu hymn singing during breakfast that feels very out of place—probably the only joy the real-life couple had while filming pretty bland scenes for their mutual friend.
I would venture a guess that everyone came together for this film in support of Will Arnett, who delivers a redefining performance in his strictly comedic career to date. Arnett captures and displays all the emotions that a divorced father feels and also the ones he tries to hide in front of his kids.
Another outstanding scene is when his kids, who sleep in his bed in the apartment, have read through his written stand up material and are concerned that his dad is depressed and worry about the fictional scenario of their mom dating a surfer. Arnett spends a complex performance as a father scolding his kids for invading his privacy, trying to calm their concerns for him, and also then addressing the pain this separation is causing them.
Arnett is earnest, raw, and conveys a feeling of being lost… the sort of making it up as you go approach to life in this drastically different reality that’s imminently relatable and all too accurate as any child of divorce will say.
The comedic rise of Alex is handled very well, it’s by far the best plotted element of the script. Alex is naturally funny — definitely a promising talent but one whose life story of being on the outs of a marriage probably does more for his career as he’s coming from a wounded place of truth amongst his peers. And the way the performances are filmed, pregnant pauses, the occasional cut to the audience, and then the tracking shot of Arnett coming off stage and getting his bearing again… it’s all magic.
Cooper’s work with cinematographer Matthew Libatique is outstanding, and responsible for so much of the intimacy of the film — from extreme closeups that capture micro-expressions to working through tight corners and the halls of the Comedy Cellar. The cinematography feels electric and unpredictable, and reminds me of the electricity felt during my first viewing of “Birdman.”
Production designer Kevin Thompson does a great job with the aesthetic of Alex’s “shabby” Manhattan apartment, his former home with Tess and the kids, and his parents’ more dated home. Particularly interesting, though not explored beyond one scene, is Alex’s father’s work on a miniature town that he assembles in his free time as a hobby.
Editor Michelle Tesoro makes the fragmented timeline feel intentional rather than haphazard, largely succeeding in creating a rhythm that mirrors Alex’s emotional journey while occasionally leaving audiences disoriented about temporal progression.
Despite the aforementioned screenplay issues, the film is a major win for Arnett as a viable leading actor and a multi-faceted performer. Cooper excels at creating environments where performers can come alive, finding truthful moments and freedom within the script to explore their own ideas.
“It This Thing On?” may not be the film that I hoped it would be from the trailer and talents involved, but it’s a very engaging affair that brings real truth to the screen, far exceeding the results of “Marriage Story” which went on to have a very successful Oscar run. I hope Cooper and Arnett will both receive similar acknowledgments for their work here.
Letter Grade: B