Welcome back for the final Mubi Monday of November! This week we have a minimalist approach to one man’s struggle to “make it” as an actor. Settle in as we dive in and look at…Ok, Good (2012).
Title: Ok, Good
Director: Daniel Martinico
Runtime: 1 hour 29 minutes
Released: January 19, 2012 (Slamdance Film Festival)
Available to stream: Exclusively on Mubi
Ok, Good (2012) is a strange, unsettling look at the life of a struggling actor. It follows Paul Kaplan (Hugo Armstrong) as he tries to keep his career dreams alive through awkward auditions, grueling self-help routines, and what feels like a never-ending cycle of rejection. The film leans hard into its minimalist, almost experimental style, and while it has moments of power, more often than not it feels more frustrating than engaging.
Paul’s world is one of repetition. For instance, we see him rehearse, practice fake smiles, and endure bizarre self-help exercises over and over and over again. It’s clearly meant to reflect how stuck he is, and to its credit, the film nails that feeling of monotony and frustration. Some scenes are so uncomfortable they’re hard to watch, like a group therapy exercise where Paul struggles to fit in. These moments are painfully honest, but they also drag on too long, testing your patience.
Hugo Armstrong delivers a committed performance, and his ability to say so much with so little is impressive. Paul’s forced smiles and nervous energy make it clear just how much he’s struggling under the surface. Armstrong gives Paul a sense of vulnerability that’s relatable, even if the film keeps him at arm’s length emotionally.
Where the movie truly shines is in capturing the harsh reality of pursuing a dream. The endless grind of auditions, the weird industry rituals, the loneliness, it’s all here, and it feels uncomfortably real. But the film doesn’t go beyond showing us this reality. It doesn’t dig deeper into who Paul is or why he’s putting himself through all of this, which makes it hard to really connect with him and care about the outcome of his auditions.
The movie’s slow pace and repetitive nature might work for some, but for most, it’ll feel like an exercise in patience. There’s also the sound design, which uses silence and droning background noise to create tension. At times, it works, making you feel the weight of Paul’s isolation. Other times, it just feels empty and dull.
Ok, Good (2012) has a lot of ambition, and it’s clear Martinico wanted to create something that makes the audience think and feel. And in some ways, it succeeds, it’s a raw, unflinching look at failure and rejection. But it also feels like it’s holding something back. Without a stronger emotional connection or a more dynamic story, the film ends up being more interesting in concept than execution.
Well, now it’s your turn. If you’ve seen Ok, Good (2012), I want to hear your thoughts on it!
Drop a comment below or tell me what you thought over on Bluesky!
As always, you can keep up with everything else that I’ve been watching over on Letterboxd.