Review: Good on Paper Might’ve Been Good Enough on Paper, but it’s Very Bad on Screen

The biggest problem with Good on Paper, a film based on a true story that’s based on a lie (stay with me here) that is rife with problematic moments, is that neither writer/star Iliza Shlesinger nor director Kim Gatewood know just what kind of film they’re trying to make. Is this a stand-up show with some narrative thrown in? A romantic comedy gone sour? A confessional? The resulting mish-mash of styles and narrative devices is so confusing and frustrating it nearly makes everything else that’s subpar in the film, from the performances to the writing to the body shaming and so on, seem inconsequential. Shlesinger is a comedian by trade (hoping to break into film, apparently, but with much left to be desired if this is her at her best with scripted content), so it’s no surprise that the moments interspersed throughout Good on Paper that are supposed to be her character performing a set (but are actually just Shlesinger doing her thing) are the film’s few bright spots.

Good on Paper
Image credit Alex Lombardi; courtesy of Netflix

Shlesinger wrote the film after actually experiencing most of what takes place on screen, only for the purposes of…something, it’s not clear what…she is Andrea Singer in the film, still a stand-up comic in LA and still doing her damnedest to break into acting, going out for audition after audition only to be rejected time and again. On a flight back to LA, she happens to strike up a conversation with the conventionally attractive, age-appropriate man sitting next to her in first class. He’s Dennis (Ryan Hansen, a man so handsome that a set of geeky glasses and a pudgy body double aren’t convincing anyone), and though he’s immediately smitten with Andrea, she’s going to take more convincing. They get to know each other, platonically, as she learns about his job as a hedge fund manager, his home that’s currently under renovation (so she can’t visit him there), his mother who’s dying of cancer…no reason not to believe any of what this well-meaning new friend shares with her.

Andrea/Shlesinger goes to great lengths to convince us (and herself) that as much as she enjoys Dennis’s company, she’s just not attracted to him (this is embarrassingly visualized by that pudgy body double…who doesn’t love some good old fashioned body shaming?), until the night he calls her with bad news about his mother’s health just as she’s in the middle of a date with someone else. The two drink themselves silly and, with alcohol to remove the blinders, Andrea realizes she could maybe be into Dennis after all. Soon, they’re dating and doing all the things dating couples do, even if Dennis’s increasingly odd and unjustified lies become too much for Andrea’s best friend Margot (Margaret Cho) to handle. Eventually, Andrea can’t deny that Dennis is, actually, a menace (sorry!), and the two set about to call him out on his bullshit. Everything that happens after this point is even more messy than the first half of the film, so I’ll spare you the gory details.

Absolutely no one in Good on Paper seems to believe any of the words they’re saying, and that doesn’t just go for Dennis the habitual liar. At certain points, Shlesinger seems so desperate to keep the whole thing from crumbling to pieces that she’s practically sweating from working so hard. What’s most disappointing is that so much of what she’s trying to do here is genuinely interesting. She’s right, women aren’t supposed to say they passed on a potential mate because they didn’t find him attractive enough. We’re supposed to settle, to be grateful someone, anyone chooses us at all. She’s right, people do get blinded by affection and try to see the best in their partner, even when it’s obvious they’re pieces of shit. And she’s definitely right, trying to make a living in the entertainment business is not easy! But all of that is sadly lost in a film that is so underdeveloped it can’t decide what it wants to be when it grows up. Now streaming on Netflix, one wonders if Shlesinger got the opportunity to produce this script thanks to her long-term relationship with the platform (she released five stand-up specials with them between 2013 and 2019), which if so, good for her. It’s just a shame they didn’t have anyone available to tell her that this script is more like a first-draft film school thesis production, one that—forgive me—was probably much better on paper.

Good on Paper is now streaming on Netflix.

Did you enjoy this post? Please consider supporting Third Coast Review’s arts and culture coverage by making a donation. Choose the amount that works best for you, and know how much we appreciate your support! 

Default image
Lisa Trifone


  1. I agree! Incredibly creative and funny! I want more! I’m sure she has thousands of stories to share that would portray different scenarios she’s experienced!

  2. He is right. Good on Paper is the worst film (of you can call it that!) that I have ever seen. Everything about it is just awful. Such a bummer. I feel so bad for everyone involved it’s embarrassingly terrible.

  3. It follows the path of so many Netflix original feature films: a fairly decent (albeit unoriginal) premise, lesser known but talented cast, a fun and well-executed first part, and then…quickly sliding into mediocrity and head-scratchingly poor editorial choices. It’s as if someone in quality control at Netflix only watches the first half of the films!

    I appreciated the unsettling portrayal of the manipulative partner who is always hiding something – it’s very real and relatable, even if this was comically exaggerated for the script.

    But then – when she starts to “find out”, things get utterly bizarre and fall into the realm of awful film cliches and inexplicable, pointless sequences. The whole highly questionable kidnapping and assault scene (as if “you could have untied yourself” is an excuse that lets them off the ethical hook?), the truly absurd and TV-drama level courtroom scene, the bathroom scene, etc. The very end was even more despicable in its attempt to totally exonerate the main character and restore her as basically a perfect person.

    Again, this seems to follow the sad trajectory of so many Netflix films I’ve tried to make it through, in the hopes that they’ve figured out how to elevate their formula…but nope, still very much C-movie level.

  4. Ouch! And wow….we must have seen and experienced a totally different film. Do you know her? It seems like you personally dislike or resent her. I found it original (maybe why some can’t figure out what “genre” it is or “what it wants to be when it grows up”–it’s , believe it or not…itself), incredibly funny, poignant, well-written, ambiguous, self-aware and appropriately self-deprecating . For example: the “pudgy” body? she admits she’s an asshole for caring….but she does care….as usually do I…as do most people care about the body of someone they’re into, if they’re going to be 100% honest….and if al the others elements are clicking–the point here was, they were not clicking, for various reasons, including her instincts were flashing to her that this guy was NOT right for her, but she couldn’t decode why, in part, hence her reaction to his physicality, which she interpreted as not being the bod of the athletic ambitious go-getting Yalie she’s “supposed to” find appropriate and desirable–all of which is pretty apparent in viewing the film (or it was to me). Whenever I see or hear or experience art (yep) that’s honest and original I get a sense of relief or release, because it’s so free from the grips of convention and expectation—it’s not reverse-engineered to please based on what others are doing. That’s the response I had to this film. Interesting to read your take on it, but surprising and nothing I can at all relate to or agree with.

Comments are closed.