Hustlers, starring Jennifer Lopez as a stripper who goes smooth criminal during the Great Recession, is getting some great reviews. I’m going against the grain on this one, for I find it derivative, boring and hampered by a shallow script.
So, why? Why has the film been receiving Scorsese comparisons (Hey, it has tracking shots!) and high scores on the Rotten Tomatometer?
I’m thinking it’s because of the powers of Jennifer Lopez’s multi-million-dollar ass.
No question, as talented an actress as Lopez has been in the past (Selena, Out of Sight, shit, I liked her in Maid in Manhattan) her physical calling card has always been her ever-present, much-ballyhooed ass. Her ass beckons to you like an evil genie. Her ass has its own economy and solar system. In fact, as Jennifer Lopez did a pole dance in this film (for the obligatory “This is how you pole dance!” scene), I could swear I saw a little astronaut just off to the left of her ass performing a spacewalk.
This is a movie in which, without question, Lopez bares and displays her crazily potent ass. She’s held it back at the movies, until now, and it is the most dominant persona in this cinematic experience. So, I’m thinking that this has caused some sort of distraction—disruption if you will—in the movie critic ecosystem. People are so hypnotized by her ass that they are failing to recognize the movie kind of blows.
Based on a true story that appeared in a New York Magazine article, Hustlers focusses on Destiny (Constance Wu), a newbie stripper trying to find her way in the big city. It appears she’s on her way to being stuck in the minor leagues of lap dancing, until Ramona (Lopez) takes the stage and shows her how to take control of her situation through determination, calculation and, yes, most importantly, showcasing your cosmically empowered ass.
Because most of their big tickets come from Wall Street, troubled times strike when the recession takes hold. That’s when the strippers, a team consisting of Destiny, Ramona, and some other girl who always vomits when things get tense, go rogue. They go fishing for suckers that they can drug while they max out their credit cards.
This is where the film teases at becoming something interesting but the crimes these girls commit don’t really make for an interesting movie. They drug a couple of high rollers (one of them played by Frank Whaley), they max out a few cards, and that’s it. I was waiting for them to kill somebody or pull off a major diamond heist. Anything to justify this movie beyond the gratuitous exhibition of Jennifer Lopez’s pulsating, seems-to-have-a-life-of-its-own, gigantic ass.
Wu is good here, and Lopez has the makings of an interesting character. None of the characters really talk all that much, and just when things seem like they will get interesting, it goes flat. It’s also worth mentioning that when this movie goes flat, Lopez’s ass goes into hiding, like a fat bear with a bellyful of honey hibernating for the winter.
As stripper movies go, this is not the worst one. Hell, it might even be the best one. Surely, it’s better than Showgirls, which featured Elizabeth Berkeley’s evil, strange ass at its core (I still have nightmares where it is trying to kill me). Striptease with Demi Moore is a non-starter, for her ass, although enviable, didn’t possess any powers—evil or good—that I could detect. As movie asses go, it was standard issue.
This movie shouldn’t be called Hustlers. It should be called Hey Look, It’s Jennifer Lopez’s Omnipotent Ass Up On Screen! Give Us Your Money! There’s another great Jennifer Lopez movie to be had, but Hustlers isn’t it. It will forever be known as the film where Jennifer Lopez said “Ah, screw it!” and finally unleashed her greatest physical asset upon the world of film. For some, that will probably be enough.
This article appears in Sep 19-25, 2019.
Oh look! The male gaze got a whole column.
This movie review tells us a lot more about its author Bob Grimm than the film itself.
Grimm’s dismissal of the film can be summarized in the article’s subhead: “Jennifer Lopez’s ass delivers a spectacular performance in Hustlers.” You can quantify the extent to which Grimm reduces the film to ass: The word “ass” appears 17 times in this article.
Grimm starts out aggrieved by the positive reception the film has received, and the whole article seems motivated by an animus to reject all positivity. “Why has the film been receiving Scorsese comparisons (Hey, it has tracking shots!),” he asks. But this comparison to Scorsese is not really helpful in understanding what works in this film what makes it valuable.
For myself, as a female viewer: WOW, this film was enjoyable, but also made me think, and resonated so deeply with my experience as a woman in a male-dominated world.
To me, the story is about struggling to survive in a corrupt economic system, and how it may be impossible to do that without losing parts of your soul. The film is set in strip clubs that serve the men of Wall Street: rich, powerful men who had every advantage coming up and now have even more power. The protagonists of the film are economically desperate women of color who find ways and justifications to get their share of the American pie. These women, played by Jennifer Lopez, Constance Wu, and others, are represented so complexly: as powerful sex symbols, as the exploited class, as criminals, as Robin Hoods.
What really struck me about the film is how much I related to the dynamics represented, although I am a privileged white-color worker bee, not a stripper/hustler. Things I related to: What it feels like to always be on the wrong side of the power balance. What it feels like to be desperate. How female friendship and collaborative power get me through a lot of despair. I would say this film absolutely transcends its subject matter and speaks to common human experiences, and in that sense it achieves the level of artful.
But in the review of this film, the male gaze saw only an ass. This is a disservice to this film, which although it may not be great, and is far from flawless, is special and represents something new in the world of film.
Reviewer tries to watch movie through the hole in his d*ck; wonders why he didnt enjoy it as much as everyone else.
Bob Grimm writes film reviews with the depth and wit so shallow I am left dumber for having read. That is a unique skill. Grimm seems to have mastered the literary style of the Brett Kavanaugh yearbook entry: a blend of Miller Lite observation, bro-think tropes and prose that can only be described as journalistic boofing. Why the Weekly has offered a bathroom stall for Grimm to scribble on I can only guess.
Oof, Tucson Weekly. This is not only a misstep, it’s offensive and reinforces the toxic masculinity that puts women in a place to earn less money, respect, and safety.
You should be ashamed of yourselves.
This review is disgusting. I can’t believe it got printed. This is so degrading, not only to the actresses in this movie, but also to any actress trying to make their way in this business. Is this all we’re worth? Our “asses”?
Please, God, Tucson Weekly, let someone else review movies with women in them in the future. Looks like Bob Grimm wont be able to handle it, unless there’s a big ol’ ass he can ogle.
Tucson weekly, this is your chance to put a woman writer to work on movie reviews. This is your chance to show The Tucson community that you hear how sick we are of this idiodic journalism.
We are extremely ready for a change.
Hmmm…I stopped reading the Tucson Weekly movie reviews a long time ago, for obvious reasons.
However, I was directed to the comments here, which I am grateful for, as I thoroughly enjoyed them. But having subjected myself to Grimm’s review for proper context in which to place the comments, I am forced to admit that the review does accomplish one thing rather well. It summarizes the reasons why I stopped reading the Weekly movie reviews quite neatly: “GRIMM IS AN ASS.”
Tucson Weekly should be ashamed they published this extremely sexist article.
Wow, you should be ashamed Tucson Weekly! This is just downright offensive and disgusting. I cant believe this even got printed. Badly done.
Reminds me of “White Guys Writing Paragraphs” – just an excuse to make puerile, “asinine” jokes. Pathetic. Those of us not sexually fixated on women’s bodies were hoping for more substantial comments, oh you know, such as reflecting on how the women were navigating and exploiting male power-structures to support themselves, and how the men underestimated them again and again because men only see women for their sexual assets (har, har). You know, like, the point of the movie.
lol still wondering why men are still hired for anything…
does no one get this is a joke? why are yall seriously getting upset about him calling a strippers ass “Omnipotent”?
Shallow idiotic out-of-touch “review”. Yikes.
Wow, I have so many feelings right now I don’t know where to begin and probably won’t be very articulate, but I have to write something, at least…
As, um … *upset* (vast understatement) as this review made me, at least the fact that it got printed has opened up this amazing conversation, with some of the most insightful, wittiest comments I’ve ever seen here! Thank you, Tucson! <3
I’m a passionate pole dancer (in a studio, but I have SO much admiration for strippers, without whom pole wouldn’t exist as we know it). I’m so busy poling and teaching pole that I haven’t been able to see this movie yet, but my pole-community pals and I plan to go ASAP.
It REALLY impressed me when I heard that this movie’s makers were careful to consult *actual* strippers and sex workers, which is pretty awesome for a mainstream film. The fact that it’s gotten so many positive reviews elsewhere makes me happy.
Grimm, ***PLEASE*** don’t go on the defense here. I really hope you can try to understand that there are experiences you don’t/can’t understand, can’t understand, experiences of people who don’t have the privileges you do. When you don’t understand something, and you’re not sure how to be an ally, usually the best thing to do is at least not take up bandwidth that might be used by those who need it.
I’m probably too late to write this; I presume these comments have already incensed you enough that you’ve stopped reading them and have convinced yourself you don’t care about these earnest people’s input … and *feelings* (people aren’t just angry; there’s a lot of hurt here!). But if you see this, just knowthe next most amazing thing that could happen here is that you acknowledge that you don’t know everything and can’t write about everything and you’ve learned something here. If you can take this as an opportunity to challenge yourself, you might be able to earn back the respect of even some of the most hardcore haters on this page. I, for one, would be blown away by a simple apology.
Woe to the man or woman who does not comply with the ongoing (sorry George
Carlin) vaginification of progressive group speak.
I enjoyed the review and hope JLO got ten millions of bucks for revealing her asset, as it’s her prerogative to do. Yet where is the anger at that decision and her role in the base objectification of women?
I don’t like everything Grimm writes, yet should he be judged and silenced cause a few are offended by this review?
NO. The salient fact here is that in a Hollywood dominated by political progressives, actors, producers, directors, they always capitalize on female/male hetero sexuality, as long as the public keeps buying tickets.