In a surprising twist, the much-anticipated buddy-cop film starring George Clooney and Brad Pitt has not lived up to expectations. Released by Apple TV+ with a staggering $200 million budget, the movie, titled Wolfs, has been panned by critics ahead of its theater debut on September 20, 2024. Despite the star power of the two leading men, the film has been described as a “messy” one-star disaster and an “unbearable comedy.”
A Familiar Plot That Falls Flat
Wolfs follows Clooney and Pitt, who reprise their dynamic partnership from Ocean’s Eleven, but this time as reluctant allies forced to fix a problem involving a hard-nosed district attorney. After a one-night stand goes wrong, and the DA wakes up next to a dead 20-something, the two protagonists are thrust into action. Unfortunately, critics have slammed the plot as lackluster, with little humor or depth.
IGN’s Siddhant Adlakha was particularly scathing, comparing the movie to a “slick student film” made by someone who’s been heavily influenced by early Guy Ritchie films. The Guardian’s Xan Brooks took a different approach, suggesting that director Jon Watts, who previously found success with the Spider-Man franchise, may have missed the mark entirely. Brooks likened the film to the well-known Spider-Man meme where two versions of the superhero point at each other, implying that the movie feels directionless.
Star Power Isn’t Enough
Many critics agree that Clooney’s and Pitt’s star status wasn’t enough to save Wolfs. The Telegraph’s Robbie Collin criticized the film as “messy” and suggested that Clooney’s recent complaints about not being considered a movie star by Quentin Tarantino might have merit if he continues to make films like this one.
Barry Levitt from The Daily Beast highlighted the repetitive nature of the film’s jokes, which revolve around the idea that neither character wants to work with the other. Levitt likened the experience of watching Wolfs to the repetitive annoyance of kids constantly asking, “Are we there yet?” during a long road trip.
A Missed Opportunity for Depth
While the film does attempt to touch on the aging process of its main characters, with scenes depicting Clooney’s creaky joints and Pitt’s groans as they bend over, these moments don’t lead to any deeper exploration of the characters. Critics like Collin believe these fleeting glimpses into the characters’ lives could have formed the basis for a more meaningful subplot, but instead, they remain superficial.
Adlakha also criticized the film’s pacing, noting that its 108-minute runtime felt much longer and increasingly frustrating as it progressed.
A Streaming Service Filler?
In the end, some critics have concluded that Wolfs is yet another example of the kind of forgettable content that streaming platforms are becoming known for. The BBC described it as a “genially watchable yet forgettable time-passer,” while Collin took a more cynical view, suggesting that films like this are created more to pad out a streaming service’s catalog than to be genuinely enjoyed by viewers.
He went on to compare Wolfs to a decorative bookshelf in a show home—impressive at first glance but ultimately hollow and meaningless.
What’s Next for Clooney and Pitt?
While Wolfs may not be the cinematic triumph fans had hoped for, it remains to be seen how the film will be received by general audiences when it hits theaters. As for Clooney and Pitt, their long careers have seen both highs and lows, and one underwhelming film is unlikely to tarnish their legacies. However, it’s clear that even Hollywood’s biggest stars aren’t immune to the pitfalls of modern filmmaking.