‘Nutcrackers’ review: Ben Stiller aims for ‘Uncle Buck’ and misses

When a filmmaker begins their curtain speech with how their movie is a rejection of cynicism, as David Gordon Green did before the Toronto Film Festival premiere of his new film Nutcrackers, it sets off certain alarm bells in critics. It seems like a clumsy attempt at critic-proofing a film by implying that if you don’t like it, you are the problem. You are insufficient in humanity! (These same sentiments were said by a producer in the curtain speech before the premiere of Chris Pine’s Poolman, which turned out to be one of the worst films to debut at TIFF in 2023.) So, when Green announced he made Nutcrackers in the tradition of such crass yet charming comedies as The Bad News Bears and Uncle Buck, his public denouncement of cynicism and viciousness was already a red flag that he’d fallen short. 

Nutcrackers has superficial similarities to its inspiration points. This comedy is about a child-free middle-aged man coming to appreciate caring for children. But it fails to get as gruffly funny — or funny at all — as those films. As Green aims to remind critics and audiences that he is capable of more than his deeply grim horror reboots (like the Halloween trilogy and The Exorcism: Believer) or chaotic stoner comedies, he’s offered a silly and sentimental muddle of a movie that’s neither satisfying nor fun. 

Nutcrackers was inspired by four real brothers. 

Nutcrackers centers on Michael, a self-centered Chicago real estate developer (Ben Stiller) who is pressured to play guardian to his four rowdy nephews after their parents’ unexpected deaths. Pulling up to their family farm in a bright yellow sports car, Uncle Mike immediately establishes himself as a fish out of water. He’s wearing a fresh-pressed suit where others are in plaid and dungarees. He grumbles at the pigs bumbling about in the house. He yelps as the spirited boys chuck cheese puffs, baseballs, and other improvised missiles at his head. He is utterly mystified by their homeschooling curriculum, and overwhelmed by the abrupt role of parenthood he is expected to play until a proper foster family can be found. But of course, the framework of this story is so familiar you know right away where it will end up. Getting there, however, is a slog. 

While Stiller is the star of the movie, the four boys are the film’s inspiration. Atlas, Arlo, Ulysses, and Homer Janson are actual brothers, sons of a longtime friend of Green’s. As Time reports, it was a visit to the family farm, where the boys roughhoused and performed ballet with equal enthusiasm, that inspired Green to make this movie. It was written for them, their ages ranging from 8 to 13, aiming to capture the feral perfection of their radiant boyhood and the quirkiness of their creativity. 

While Leland Douglas is credited as the screenwriter, Green claims that the boys helped shape the story, including writing an alternate version of The Nutcracker ballet involving samurais and Rambo. I realize all of this sounds charming; the concept certainly is. But both Douglas’ script and Green’s execution coast on charisma, that of Stiller and the boys. While some moments shine — like the eldest brother’s first kiss with his crush — much of it feels exhaustingly aimless. 

Green initially sets up a ticking-clock deadline of when Uncle Mike must be back in the city, so his quest to find the boys a new home should have a sense of suspense. But time in the movie is so unclear, as one silly segment clunks into another, that both the stakes and the could-be tension fall flat. Instead, it’s a barrage of scenes of bonding and bickering and hijinks with little momentum. 

Mashable Top Stories

Ben Stiller feels like an odd choice for this premise. 

When David Gordon Green cited his inspirations for the film ahead of its premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival’s opening night, he subtly drew a direct line from the comedy stylings of Walter Matthau and John Candy to that of Ben Stiller. But Stiller’s character is nothing like the grumbling drunken baseball coach or the lovable slob uncle either of those actors portrayed — blue collar screw-ups, essentially. His Mike is more like Emilio Estevez in The Mighty Ducks, the sleek businessman whose priorities are woefully focused on his professional ambitions. Of course, Stiller adds a dash of his signature frantic neuroticism to the mix. 

Stiller is out of place here, as he plays broad comedy against the boys’ more naturalistic tone and dialogue. He’s game to be playfully pelted by the boys, perform pratfalls, and play the fool. Linda Cardellini, playing a cheery social worker with endless patience and a very clumsily wedged-in tragic backstory, attempts to bridge these approaches in scenes with the uncle and his nephews. But her role is so thin it can’t support this disconnect. 

Also thinly realized are the boys themselves. The eldest gets the most screen time and character development, striving to be the grown-up in the room when Uncle Mike is flailing, but also still yearning to be a boy who can cradle the thrill of a first crush. The second oldest is chiefly chatty comic relief, while the twins are barely given names, much less an arc. 

Each boy is given at least a brief moment in the spotlight. What’s clear is Green’s affection for these boys, their farm, where the movie was shot, and a general way of life that embraces everything from animals in the house to ballet performed on the fields and streets. But the plotting is too clumsy and not balanced by standout bits. 

Ultimately, Nutcrackers is a collection of scenes and ideas and feelings, but not a cohesive movie. Sure, the Janson boys are winsome, but there are only so many times the same poop joke works. Perhaps Green didn’t allow himself the distance to find the path in this terrain that fascinated him, leaving his audience lost in the ideas or intentions that go nowhere. 

In the end, Nutcrackers aims for feel-good comedy but lands more in feel-meh. 

Nutcrackers was reviewed out of its world premiere at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival.