It is still summer so it cannot end until a Melissa McCarthy movie is released in theaters. Her films can be hit or miss, but I was interested in seeing “The Starling” (2021) because Theodore Melfi directs it. Melfi helmed “St. Vincent” (2014), which McCarthy and Chris O’Dowd also appeared in, and “Hidden Figures” (2016), which means that he gets a blank check for the next film; thus McCarthy 2021 summer flick became a must-see film.
“The Starling” focuses on Lilly (McCarthy), who is the anchor in her marriage after tragedy sparks a separation from her husband, Jack (O’Dowd), who is getting treatment at a residential facility and is not eager to resume regular life. Neither knows how life should look after this chasm, and if they will be able to navigate their way back to themselves and each other. Because Lilly is busy trying to maintain a sense of normalcy, unlike Jack, she has no regimen to cope with this loss so she finds herself preoccupied with a bird terrorizing her while she tends her garden and gets a referral to see a local vet who used to be a therapist, Larry Fine (Kevin Kline).
I really wanted to like “The Starling,” but it felt as if it needed a few more revisions before filming. I get preoccupied with details while watching a film, and I could not understand how a grocery store worker and elementary school art teacher could afford a residential facility. What health insurance did they have? What state do they live in? These characters are supposed to be ordinary people, but Lilly retains her job despite needing to take time off and making big mistakes. Unless she is in a union, I don’t think so.
While I never stopped liking Lilly, her tangles with the bird felt recursive. She considers it a pest then begins to appreciate its right to life independent from her feelings about its existence. When she recognizes that the titular bird has a life then reengages in her antics to thwart its attacks only to regret it again, it felt as if these scenes needed to be switched or the anthropomorphization scene needed to be deleted. Lily’s journey as seen through the lens of her feelings about the bird was too repetitive. While I enjoy Lilly’s verbal anger and do not need a woman protagonist to be likeable or only engage in good behavior to get invested in her story, if any person starts attacking an animal, I side with the animal. While I never hated Lilly, this central storyline could have had the opposite intended effect.
“The Starling” has a recurring backdrop of the role of church and Christianity in grief that feels underdeveloped. It does not feel as if it was played for laughs. Lilly shuns real life connections from a local churchgoer. Lilly knows this person, but it is unclear if Lilly is a member, or if this woman proselytizes whenever she sees Lilly and is using this tragedy as another moment. Lilly does not seem to want to avoid the person but does not accept the invitation. Instead, Lilly watches televangelists instead of regular television. People who watch that kind of programming usually have a different life trajectory than the one that Lilly has. These details did not blend into the overall story.
When you watch “The Starling,” you should pay attention to details because even the most casual action will later be revealed to be imbued with significance, including the starling as it relates to the characters’ central conflict. I did not expect that a starling would be a foil to the protagonist. I would not be surprised if John Irving, Robert Altman and Orson Welles inspired Matt Harris’ debut film screenplay. A hidden treat in a paper bag becomes the Rosebud key to the film. An eleventh-hour craft project becomes a metaphor for the choices that the characters face. While I intellectually appreciated these details, it also felt heavy-handed and as if the mailman from “Don’t Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood” (1996) was going to jump out and scream, “Message!”
I came into the “The Starling” expecting that Lilly’s story is central, but there is a shift midway to Jack’s struggle, and the indication that we are really watching a different type of rom com, a remarriage dramedy. The filmmakers were more invested in the marriage than it initially appeared. There is an uneven scene when it appears that Jack finally got his groove back then the tone shifts at breakneck speed as to indicate that his behavior is alarming, but the transition does not work. The film has the same problem when characters rebuke Lilly for delivering some funny one liners. The film feels as if it is at war with itself regarding what the film should be conveying to the viewers. The film is mistakenly furtive about why Jack is in this facility. Did he cause the tragedy? Did he commit a crime? Did he get addicted to drugs? When he gets a chance to monologue about his long-term struggles, I realized that I would have viewed his character differently and more sympathetically if I had known about his medical history from the beginning. Instead, I put this character in the same box as O’Dowd’s self-absorbed husband from “Juliet, Naked” (2018). Though likeable and sympathetic, he was an ill-fit for a woman that a viewer would want to set her up with. The filmmakers did not seem to understand how to depict mental health issues and plays it for laughs with one character at the margins, whom Loretta Devine plays.
“The Starling” treats all its supporting characters as if they exist to help the main characters. I have zero sense of what their lives are like outside of their relationship with the character even Larry. He exists to care for animals and Lilly though he resents the latter. He gets a monologue to explain why he switched careers, but it does not explain the rest of his life.
I understand why such an amazing cast was interested in the dramedy. McCarthy gets to put her physical humor in the backseat and explore her furthest dramatic corners in silence as she imbues grief into quotidian activities. She must quietly carry most of the film without relying on her considerable humor skills, and she meets the challenge. Skyler Gisondo, who plays Lilly’s coworker, Dickie, quietly steals the show with some funny moments. Daveed Diggs appears as a sensitive, understanding attendant, but it is the kind of forgettable role that made me doubt whether I accurately recognized Diggs. Rosalind Chao as Larry’s assistant seems to like him, but the film turns her character into an exposition fairy at the beginning to prepare us for his appearance, and she seems to hate him. Either they saw something more in the script than I saw onscreen, but they deserved better. Owen Atlas made a big impression!
“The Starling” was entertaining and enjoyable, but it fails to touch foreign films’ excellence at depicting grieving characters in a realistic and relatable way. With a runtime of one hundred three minutes, it needed to be way shorter.
