Fisherman’s Friends

I wanted to like this movie.  I wanted to like this movie a lot.  I love sea shanties, something I’m aware is unusual, and am familiar with the band on which the movie is based.  It’s not a bad movie either. It’s just not quite fun enough, not quite funny enough, not quite charming enough to be good. Harmless and forgettable is perhaps the most apt way to describe Fisherman’s Friends.

The first thing a little bit off about it is the story itself.  Everything is based on real life except twisted to be more interesting for a movie.  In the film, the character who discovers the band is a music executive named Danny. He happens to be traveling in Cornwall with some coworkers, including his boss, and pursues the band after being told by his boss, as a “prank,” to get the group to sign a contract. This provides some fairly over the top acting by said coworkers, and some mean spirited behavior that never felt like something even mean spirited people would do in real life.  Of course, they didn’t. The real band, Port Isaac’s Fisherman’s Friends, was discovered by a radio personality, not a music executive, and everything about the pursuit of the band, including the prank, was made up for the movie.

In the interests of making the story more compelling, a love interest is also provided for the fictitious executive.  While this story is as paint by the numbers as one could imagine, Danny, his love interest, and her daughter all work well together.  Still, it frustratingly sets up some ideas it never pays off.  For example, the movie toys with the idea that the executive is only staying in town because he is interested in sex, not because he is interested in the band.  This never goes anywhere.  It isn’t revealed that he was lying to his colleagues to get more time to work with the Fisherman’s Friends when he should be returning to London, assuming they would be more understanding of a chauvinist desire to get laid than a genuine interest in the group.  Nor is it ever a point of contention in the relationship itself. Not that this wouldn’t be cliche in its own right, but nothing comes from the premise that he started with ulterior motives but ended with real feelings, a la 10 Things I Hate About You, How to Lose A Guy in 10 Days, or She’s All That.  The same emotional set up could also have been applied to the band itself, in that Danny’s initial interest in them does not come from a genuine place, but in the same way this idea is hinted at without ever being explored.

The real story of Port Issac’s Fisherman’s Friends ends with them getting a record deal, but that doesn’t fit the traditional structure of a movie, so a subplot is added wherein Danny brokers the sale of a community pub to an outside buyer, as the current owners are facing bankruptcy.  The resolution of this subplot is what gives the movie a conflict and resolution on which to hang its third act. The conflict, however, is criminally cliche and the fallout is terribly melodramatic in the way it plays out, and is performed, which cheapens the ending of the movie.

If they were going to manufacture conflict, I think they would have been better off making it about the band itself, such as clashes between the members and management or by extending the period where Danny is trying to find the band a good deal.  Maybe a label is willing to give them a deal but on terrible terms, which could create conflict around whether to sign or not. The bar failing could even be included here if the conflict was around getting some money now, which would help save the bar, versus getting more money in the future from a fairer deal, but having to give up the bar.  This way, the climax of the movie could be the Fisherman’s Friends getting their record to chart in the UK, proving the status quo of the music industry wrong, and reaping the rewards. Instead, that’s how the third act opens, leaving the rest of the act exclusively for this tacked on bit about the bar being sold.

My last quibble is about casting.  Specifically the main executive. The actor is fine in the role, but he doesn’t look or sound the part at all.  While the group he travels to Cornwall with in the beginning are exactly the kind of young, slick, stylish, and aloof Londoners you would expect to work in the music industry and treat others like trash, the main character is fairly goofy looking and doesn’t have the same urbane accent.  This separates him from the others, perhaps foreshadowing the ultimate divergence of their paths, but it also makes his “transformation” from rich lout to man of the people less impactful.

It is hard for me to decide if this movie is good or bad.  When I consider it against the movies I think are truly awful, Fisherman’s Friends is clearly better.  However, when I consider its many faults, it gets harder and harder for me to call it good, or even mediocre.  It’s cliche, it’s full of moments of unnecessary melodrama, and it’s final act is really dumb and badly executed.  That being said, there were plenty of moments where the movie’s British sensibility and humor shine through, so how much does that counteract its numerous failings?  Ultimately, I think Fisherman’s Friends is akin to a Hallmark movie; the kind about Christmas and not spousal abuse. Sappy, cliche, something you might have on in the background while you clean the house or fold laundry but not something you would watch in earnest.

Would Recommend: If you are looking for something simple and heartwarming.

Would Not Recommend: If saccharine sweet movies trigger your diabetes.