The Merry Gentlemen (2024)

The Merry Gentlemen is essentially a Hallmark Christmas movie with a premise Hallmark would never touch: a Broadway dancer in a Rockettes analog returns home to the small town where she grew up, then uses her abilities to save her family's pub by producing a show consisting of male strippers (and she finds love in the process, but you already assumed that). It's no surprise Netflix picked this one up - in addition to being less adverse to risqué subject matter, they've been pushing the "high-concept Christmas romcom" angle even more aggressively than Hallmark recently. And with good reason - there's a shocking volume of these coming out every year, and offering up content with a provocative description is an effective way to garner attention and views. And "Hallmark Christmas Magic Mike" is certainly attention grabbing.

Speaking of which, I should probably acknowledge that I haven't actually seen the Magic Mike movies. I did see The Full Monty a few decades ago, but I can't say I remember it all that well. So if there are any direct references to those, they went over my head.

For those deciding whether to see this or not, the movie is decent for what it is. In fact, the first half was better than decent, but the script seemed to run out of story about halfway through, at which point it started filling the runtime with copious dance montages (I'm guessing that's a feature rather than a bug for some viewers). Be aware the dancing (and everything else) is on the PG end of the spectrum. The movie features plenty of shots of shirtless men dancing, but that's as far as it goes. This leans closer to the Hallmark template than it does to that of a raunchy sex comedy (unlike, say, the 2020 Netflix release, Holidate).

Actually, there's some interesting subtext here around the seeming contradiction of a family-friendly stripper movie. The movie opens with the protagonist, Ashley (Britt Robertson) dancing in the aforementioned Rockettes knock-off troop. The movie doesn't directly explore the parallels between this style of choreographed dance and the "male dance revue" she develops, but it's certainly there. And while the movie has fun playing with the semantic distinction between "dance revue" and "strippers," it's notable there's no moralizing or shaming the dancers or Ashley - at no point does anyone consider the performance unacceptable, and the men are rewarded narratively for trying something new. The simple decision to have all this happening out in the open felt somewhat revolutionary: we don't even see her explain the show to her parents, who are both more than happy to try Ashley's idea. The dancing is all folded into a fairly mundane narrative about family Christmas traditions and overcoming stage fright. In short, this is implicitly sex-positive despite not including any actual sex.

That said, there's something missing in all this. The dance performances are attended by scores of cheering, excited women enjoying the show. As refreshing as it is to see a family Christmas movie portray female desire in an ultimately wholesome light, I kept wondering why there were no gay men in attendance (or at least none I noticed). The omission felt odd, both in terms of theme and realism. More importantly, it came off a bit regressive in a movie that was otherwise mostly the opposite (aside from the decision to follow the typical "successful city woman moves home to rediscover what actually matters", but I'm inclined to give them a pass for conforming to the default template when the point is to contrast that template with a seemingly incompatible premise).

I feel like I've already covered half the plot, but let's try and be a little more specific: Ashley loses her job when the producers decide to replace her mid-season with a younger dancer. Both the script and Robertson make some interesting, compelling choices around her reaction to all this, saving the movie from devolving into cliches right off the bat (that won't happen until the third act, but I'm getting ahead of myself).

At any rate, Ashley decides to spend the holidays with her parents back in the small town she came from. Her folks run a small bar famous for concerts and other acts. But times are tough, and Ashley soon discovers they're on the verge of closing down. Unless they get thirty thousand dollars, the landlord is going to rent the space to a new client who's agreed to cover the previous occupants' debts. So... actually everyone's really nice and cordial about this, which I think is meant to be subvert expectations but instead makes for underwhelming stakes.

Naturally, Ashley takes it upon herself to save the establishment, which she associates with the holidays and childhood memories. To do this, she comes up with the idea for the male dance revue and names it "The Merry Gentlemen." The first guy she enlists is a handyman, Luke (Chad Michael Murray), who she's already butted heads with for the usual dumb reasons.

In case anyone's reading this who's never seen a movie before... actually, never mind, even you know he's going to be the love interest. These things don't even try to hide it.

She also ropes in her brother-in-law, the bartender, a cab driver, and a retired guy from the bar (well, technically he ropes himself in, but let's not split hairs). She teaches them dance moves, helps Luke confront stage fright (which surprisingly seems to be a general fear of performing, rather than concerns about stripping), and gives a semi-inspiring speech. Then the show opens in early December, and....

It's immediately successful. This is what I meant when I said the movie runs out of plot. Structurally, this is usually where things typically wouldn't work out, calling for characters to learn some sort of lesson, undergo arcs, and return to redeem themselves in the third act. But the show just kind of goes as planned. They get good reviews, they're on their way towards earning the money they need, and Ashley and Luke develop feelings for each other.

The next section is just kind of more of this. The show develops, they do theme nights, there are minor issues required the addition of new members... Mostly, though, it's an excuse for more dancing and more romcomming as Luke and Ashley's relationship develops.

The third act twist, unsurprisingly, comes in the form of a phone call offering Ashley her old dancing job back - along with a raise and a three year contract - if she'll fly back to New York on Christmas Eve, abandoning the Merry Gentlemen and Luke. She struggles with this, her family tells her they'll support her either way, Luke feels betrayed when she decides to leave... you know the drill. She decides to stay at the last minute and rushes back in time to save the show (Luke was about to walk away for want of a friendly face - don't ask). This stuff would all be very generic Christmas romcom if it weren't about amateur male strippers.

The movie ends with the bar saved, though honestly it's unclear why the bar wasn't functionally saved as soon as they got press and attention right after the first performance. Likewise, it's hard to take Ashley's goal of raising the thirty thousand dollars her parents owed seriously. She accomplishes this, of course, but... would it really have mattered if she'd come up short? She already proved the club was financially viable, which should have been enough for the landlord, who was really only looking for a replacement tenant to help Ashley's parents get out of their lease without financial difficulty.

The stakes for Ashley's career are even less dire. From a character standpoint, her journey's supposed to be realizing she doesn't need to be the star and can be happy behind the scenes. Where the movie comes up short is in selling the offer to return to New York as an enticing one. It's pretty obvious she'd be better off transitioning to directing/choreographing after her success with The Merry Gentlemen. Given the news coverage she's gotten (to say nothing of the money she's raking in) that certainly seems like a better long-term strategy than dancing another three years before she's inevitably replaced again.

You're left with a bizarre situation in which the best choice for her career, her family, and her love life is the same. It's not at all unbelievable a performer would be tempted by an opportunity to keep performing, but it strips away even the veneer of uncertainty as to how this is all going to end. Once we see that the show works, there's really no tension in the movie.

I know, I know: "low stakes" is kind of a hallmark (pun not intended) of the subgenre. But I've never really been onboard with the idea that should be the default. And given how well the movie sold a couple early character beats, I found the last act disappointing. Likewise, the comedy got dialed back for this section. The first act had some good jokes, but those largely vanished by the end (this tonal shift also kind of comes with the subgenre, so if you're a bigger fan of the comforting romcom template, ignore this criticism).

Overall, this was a fine installment in a crowded field. As usual, the selling point is the gimmick - if the premise is enough to get you to watch, you're almost certainly going to enjoy yourself. And there's some good stuff here, though unfortunately the bulk of it's frontloaded. Robertson and Murray do good work throughout (particularly Murray, who's the movie's MVP). On their own, I liked both actors quite a bit, but there's a catch: they're great individually, but not so well together. I just didn't buy them as a couple.

This is a solid entry but not quite an exceptional one. I had high hopes after the first forty minutes, though, which is an accomplishment in itself, considering the budget and the fact I'm really not the target demographic here.