Riff Raff Movie Review, Pete Davidson

Riff Raff Review: Less riffing more raff

RIFF RAFF (2025)

Truth be told, I didn’t have high hopes for director Dito Montiel’s – A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints (2006), Man Down (2015) – latest offering Riff Raff, but the cast was intriguing. I mean, Bill Murray as a shady underworld crime boss accompanied by the preternaturally creepy/depressive Pete Davidson has a lot of comedic potential. Add to this the ever-horny Jennifer Coolidge and super serious Ed Harris as ex-spouses? Okay, let’s watch these chips fall. Well, unfortunately the concoction never amounts to more than a few entertaining scenes between these capable stars. Two characters that were genuinely interesting are the relative newbies/unknowns on the acting scene. Harris’ younger adopted son DJ, is played by the refreshingly sweet Miles J. Harvey – The Babysitter (2017), Supercool (2021), and older bad boy son Rocco, Lewis Pullman – Bad Times at the El Royale (2018), Skincare (2024) – starts off as a charicature, only to be extremely relatable as one with odds stacked against him doing the best he can. And his best ain’t bad. The story is a simple one, with details revealed naturally and somewhat realistically, save the grossly overused Fabula and Syuzhet structure of showing the ending of the film as a prologue. Add to this an unnecessary voiceover. I find voiceovers overused in general, however when done well they add colour and depth –  The Shawshank Redemption (1994), Taxi Driver (1976), Fight Club (1999), Adaptation (2002). Here it is distracting and simplistic, adding nothing beyond what the film is readily conveying. Overall, a capable cast was assembled for a script that isn’t sure what it wants to be, flip-flopping between foolish situation comedy (that occasionally works) and a dark crime thriller (that also occasionally works). I usually love a good ol’ mixin’ up of genres, and this mixed bag of personalities and kooky exchanges is entertaining for a while, but it all must amount to something; a satisfying point, emotional investment, a reason for being. Instead, it has little to say if anything at all beyond, family is family. A fine sentiment, but it’s one that, after all the struggle, should be satisfying and felt. Instead, it’s merely shrugged at, dismissed, like riff raff I suppose. What rubbish.

WATCH OR NOT: NOT

Additional musings: *Spoilers ahead* The epilogue for this film shows a character who suffered two gunshots (one to the back), sitting at a table a few weeks later. Are we supposed to believe they survived without hospitalization? Why make a film rooted in stark realism, only to throw out all semblance of plausibility at the very end?

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *