Notting Hill (1999, UK)

I was reading (and loving) this book called From Notting Hill with Love... Actually by Ali McNamara, basically a chick lit whose main character loves chick flicks. Of course she mentions this one constantly, and since I've never seen it, I decided to give it a go.

So, eh. To start with, I just have never seen the appeal in Hugh Grant. Sure, I liked him in Bridget Jones as the skeazy Daniel Cleaver, and he's definitely attractive, but his nice guy roles are never that enjoyable to me. I like Julia Roberts quite a bit, and one of my all-time favorite chick flicks is My Best Friend's Wedding, but for some reason I had a bad feeling about this one. Maybe it's the smirk she has on in poster.

Yeah, the concept was cute, but I wouldn't it make more sense for a chick flick to be about a famous man falling for a normal woman, instead of vice versa? I mean, that would make the predominant audience swoon. (Though I do love a man in a bookstore!)  And the whole romance was really sweet. The spilling orange juice, the awkwardness of the first meeting... but then she randomly kisses him and it feels very disjointed, and that's the whole basis for their continuing relationship. I feel like if the initial attraction made more sense and flowed more smoothly, the good parts about the rest of it would have seemed great. (For instance, him having to interview her and pretending to be a journalist from Horse & Hound!)

And okay, I always say that I love Rhys Ifans and he is an under-appreciated actor, but in this case, I had too much of him the second he was on the screen. His character is dirty, both literally and figuratively, and he just made my skin crawl. Why was he there? Sure he made Hugh Grant's character look even more charming (and normal!) in comparison, but for the most part his ewwww factor completely took away from the story. For that alone, I went from a 3.0 to a 2.5.

There are better chick flicks out there. I need to go have a Bridget Jones lovefest to rinse this one out of my brain. And just as a side note, in case anyone is even reading this or cares, apparently there's going to be a third Bridget Jones movie. Now that's what I call good news!

Rating: 2.5

Romantics Anonymous (2010, France)

This was a cute enough movie with some good underlying serious issues, but I was still a bit disappointed. Having heard it described as Amélie meets Chocolat, I was expecting greatness. It wasn't bad, it just didn't live up to its hype—or its potential.

I did love the two main actors. Both were absolutely endearing and... I can't think of the word. Normal and average don't quite get it. Maybe ordinary? I think the title must have been a play on words, because while they were both secretly romantics, they were also overemotional (mostly anxious). Their anxiety was fascinating to watch. It was of course overplayed for comedy, but it also rang true. It was a delicate balance that ultimately succeeded.

 The setting was also a lot of fun. They work in a struggling chocolate factoring that needs rescuing, and all four of their coworkers are just right and all a bit stereotypical. Two mothering middle aged women and two young, slender, androgynous men who are all invested in the company and in the lives of their boss and the new employee.

So with all this charmingness, how did it fall short? There were just too many places were things were set up for a perfect line or plot twist that never happened. Everything was too easy (even for a romantic comedy) and a brilliant concept ultimately went to waste. I would still recommend it, just not too enthusiastically.

Rating: 3.5

Angus, Thongs, and Perfect Snogging (2008, UK)

How fitting... Immediately after a middle-aged romantic comedy, I see a teenaged romantic comedy! The series of books that this movie was based on might have been the only young adult books that I read as a young adult. When I saw that they had made a movie, I was so excited. But it didn't come to the States, and it didn't come to DVD. We have just changed from dish to cable and gotten many new channels, and I've spent the last few days flipping and watching random stuff, something I haven't done in at least 5 years. Long (and pointless) story short, I turned to Nickelodeon or ABC Family or some such channel the second this movie was started. I was psyched!

I loved Georgia Groome. I didn't really have a picture of Georgia Nicholson clearly in my head (at least anymore), but she was exactly right. I also liked the actors who played her parents and Robbie (who kind of reminded me of a mix between Logan Lehrman and someone else I can't quite put my finger on). The movie was funny like the book (though maybe not as funny as I would have found it 13 years ago), and also really cute. It is definitely the Bridget Jones for the younger set. It was charmingly British and wonderfully uplifting for non-perfect girls everywhere.

I would definitely watch this again—bonus points for the nostalgia factor. I also keep telling myself that I need to reread these books sometime soon. Maybe now's the time!

Rating: 4.0

Hope Springs (2012, U.S.)

This was a cute movie. It's nice to see the middle aged equivalent of romantic comedies popping up here and there. While this wasn't as funny as It's Complicated, it was much more thought-provoking. It was very simply plotted (a couple goes to out-of-town marriage counseling) but unflinchingly honest. The humor was the humor of reality, and at times it could even be called uncomfortable.

Meryl Streep is just lovely and brilliant, of course. Tommy Lee Jones was beyond perfect as the husband. I can't even put into words how he embodied the character of a set-in-his-ways, taking-his-wife-for-granted, slightly curmudgeonly man of a certain age. As a couple, they had the perfect chemistry, for lack of a better word. I could easily believe that they were a couple of more than 30 years, living in the same house in separate bedrooms and dealing with the issues they speak to their counselor about. Speaking of the counselor, Steve Carell didn't stand out here, but he was perfect as a therapist gently nudging his clients into discovering themselves and the issues in their partnership. Letting Streep and Jones shine with his understated performance was the best possible choice.

I would definitely recommend this to ladies (and gentlemen) of a certain age.

Rating: 3.5

This Means War (2012, U.S.)

I'm going back and forth on this one, between liking and really liking. It certainly stands out in the romantic comedy genre with its unique plot. Spy versus spy? Perfect set up for both verbal and physical comedy, totally unrealistic but still enjoyable. Not only is the love triangle aspect pretty well done, but the focus is more on the competition between the guys that the relationships with the girl.

That being said, Reese Witherspoon totally stole the show from the guys. I think she is just great. She's strong in dramatic roles and perfect in romantic comedies, and she always adds a touch of class to the most ridiculous movies. I loved her position as a consumer product tester, which was a unique job for a heroine and also contributed some good joke potential. She was adorable dancing around her kitchen to rap music, and so witty when she basically told FDR (who tried to pick her up in the video store by choosing a movie for her) that she could pick apart his moves and she obviously wasn't he was looking for. She was great. I liked Chris Pine as FDR—very cute, very full of himself, very smooth. But I really loved Tom Hardy as Tuck—modest, adorable, thoughtful, not shy so much as reserved. (Side note: while I was imdb-ing this movie, I saw a discussion board about how ugly his teeth are and how they detract from his appearance. It's funny, if you search for pictures of him online, you only find him with his mouth closed. But I never noticed his teeth, so I guess they added to his character.)

I didn't see the ending coming at all, including who she would choose. My friend explained to me why she had to choose the one she did, but I was rooting for the other team, so I didn't like it! Still it was surprising and fun, so I'll bump it up above the standard romantic comedy 3.5.

Rating: 4.0

Crazy, Stupid, Love (2011, U.S.)

This was a really fun comedy. As I was adding all the tags for this post, I realized that it comes to us from the same directors as I Love You, Phillip Morris. They have a strange gift, those two.

The concept of this movie was quite fresh, the actors were great, the writing was funny. The whole thing just worked. To start with the concept: a woman (Moore) has an affair (due to a midlife crisis) with a coworker (Bacon) and wants to divorce her husband (Carrell). The husband starts spending a lot of time in a bar bemoaning the fact, where a hot young ladies' man (Gosling) overhears him and decides to take the older man under his tutelage. (Ladies' man, meanwhile, has his eye on a special girl in the bar, who is very reserved, doesn't fall for his tricks, and is wrapped up in a loveless relationship already.) While all this is happening, the middle aged couple's 13-year-old son has fallen in love with his 17-year-old babysitter, who in turn has fallen in love with his dad. This seems very complicated and confusing, yet the execution of all these overlapping stories is flawlessly done, perfectly illustrating the many types and facets of love.

This is in large part due to the excellent writing. From the very beginning, there are some laugh out loud, hilarious lines. One of my favorites was something Moore's character said to explain her midlife crisis, along the lines of: "You know when I told you when I had to work late? I really went to go see the new Twilight movie by myself, and it was so bad. Why did I do that?" There's just witticism after witticism, along with some funny physical comedy. (I especially love Gosling repeatedly slapping Carrell to make him snap out of it.) It all culminates with an excellent scene that brings the entire cast together. It's visually and verbally funny, as well as touching, sad, and very real.

The actors really help pull this off. I have mixed feelings about Steve Carrell, but like his performance in Dan in Real Life, I thought he was wonderful here, as a father, lover, friend, man, person. Gosling, as usual, was great. This wasn't his best ever movie, but he was still on his game. And boy was he sexy with his playboy mannerisms, perfectly tailored suits, self-confidence, and naked sauna scene! The supporting cast was also strong, especially the kids. They gave clever, believable, funny performances.

I think the only reason I couldn't give this a higher rating was because I didn't like how much Moore's character got away with. She was such a hypocrite, causing huge messes that everyone else cleaned up and then apologized to her for. Also, I'm always hesitant when a character has to dramatically change (a la Grease) to get the girl/guy. Otherwise, really great romantic comedy/family drama/ensemble piece.

Rating: 3.5

Bride Wars (2009, U.S.)

I have to say that I was underwhelmed by this one. I really think that Kate Hudson is the queen of romantic comedy (although this wasn't really a rom-com, strictly speaking) and I have developed a new appreciation for Anne Hathaway, plus the concept looked good. I thought this was going to be a really cute, really funny little chick flick, but it just wasn't that great.

Sure, there were some funny moments, but they could have been funnier. They also had great set-ups for potential jokes that were left hanging. It's even possible that Hudson is losing her touch. On top of all this, I just didn't think it was that well written. Neither of the relationships, much less both, seem strong enough to lead to marriage. On the other hand, the girls' friendship seemed strong enough that it wouldn't fall apart with the slightest tension as it did. A lot of pieces didn't mesh. Also, I saw the "twist" ending coming from about 20 or 30 minutes into the flick, which doesn't say much for the writing/plotting.

A good word to characterize this one is weak. Weak characters, weak writing, even weak acting. For a Hudson rom-com fix, see How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. For a Hathaway rom-com fix, see Love and Other Drugs.

Rating: 2.5

Love and Other Drugs (2010, U.S.)

I was really surprised by how much I liked this movie. Of course I was excited to see it because I love Jake Gyllenhaal, though I've never been especially fond of Anne Hathaway. (What made me decide I didn't like her? It seems like everything I've ever seen her in, I've been impressed. Maybe her voice bothers me? I can't figure it out! I guess from now on, I'll say I like her a lot.) Anyway, this movie was great. A lot of movies from the 1990s feel very dated, but this movie made last year about the 1990s felt not quite nostalgic, not quite historical, but something like that. Instead of feeling "so 1990s," it felt like it was recreating a sort of idealized '90s. It's hard to explain, but in any case, it worked well.

The setup was also very effective. It opens showing Jamie (Jake Gyllenhaal) selling electronics (very '90s electronics!) to men, women, old ladies with equal success. The brief scene really defines Jamie as a born salesman and charmer. And the ensuing tryst with the manager's girlfriend in the storeroom defines him as a born womanizer... and charmer. It's quite a surprise when we next find him at his wealthy parents home, with a father and sister who are doctors and a brother who is a software millionaire. His background seems so unlikely with his current life.

Anyway, he eventually gets into selling pharmaceuticals for Pfizer, mainly trying to get doctors to prescribe Zoloft instead of Prozac. The insight into the drug industry is absolutely fascinating. I don't really know that much about it, but it felt realistic to me, at least. And there is a lot of industry humor thrown in that was truly amusing, and once he starts selling Viagra, it only gets better. Normally I'm not into crude humor, and one would think that selling a sex drug and jokes about its use and situational comedy (think long-lasting erections) would not amuse me at all, but it was actually done fairly tastefully and made me laugh out loud. Surprising.

In the middle of all this drug-selling, Jamie meets Maggie, a woman of 26 with early-onset Parkinson's Disease. Her character was so complex it was nearly staggering. There's her disease and her worries about it and her refusal to be defined by it. There's her art. There's her undefined job, which involves taking senior citizens to Canada where they can afford their prescriptions. (Yet more commentary on the drug industry.) There's her desire for frequent no-strings sex and refusal to be in a relationship, even when it's obvious to the viewer that she's falling in love. Anne Hathaway was absolutely stellar in her performance, down to her shaking hands and lethargy (caused by her illness) and up to her flawlessly-performed emotional breakdowns. Paired with Jake Gyllenhaal's charming, selling, womanizing Jamie, it just really worked. Great stuff. (I also have to insert a side note on a subject I don't usually take the time to comment on: sex scenes. Some were strangely detached feeling, which I suppose is good since it was a no-strings relationship in the beginning. But one was especially beautiful once they were more together... It's raining outside and it's shot through the window, so all the viewer sees is the watery, unfocused forms of very gentle lovers on a lovely deep red bedspread. It was quite beautiful.)

Basically, it had all the hallmarks of the best of the best romantic comedies, but I almost don't want to call it that. Mostly the comedy came from his job and the romance was much more dramatic (and far from funny), and these two elements were combined flawlessly. Added to the very unique characters and plot, the quasi-nostalgic (or whatever you want to call it) feel, the interesting details of the pharmaceutical industry and Parkinson's disease, and some wonderful performances, this was one of the best "romantic comedies" I've ever seen.

Rating: 4.0

Letters to Juliet (2010, U.S.)

I thought that this movie looked really cute, and I like Amanda Seyfried quite a bit. Needless to say, I was quite disappointed.

The whole thing felt way too contrived, with stilted dialogue that almost bordered on wooden at times (and had a false ring a majority of the time). Overall, the writing was terrible. Aside from the dialogue problems, a lot of the plot was just too much of a stretch when it could have been much smoother. Parts were too easy, convenient, and basically unrealistic. I think "oversimplified" is the best word I can come up with.

The actors weren't bad. Seyfriend wasn't her best, but still cute. Her fiance was a Mexican actor playing a goofy maybe-Italian, which was a very strange choice. They do get extra points for casting Vanessa Redgrave, who is an absolute film goddess. I did like the male lead, who had very good comedic timing. He had a very strong (and to my untrained ear, accurate) British accent, but every now and then it went a little weird—turns out he's Australian. He also had something in his face (though not his acting) that reminded me of Heath Ledger, which was odd.

Anyway, this was a sweet concept that was terribly executed. Very unfortunate.

Rating: 2.0

Après vous (2003, France)

Antoine is a maitre d' in Paris. He's a good man who always says "yes" to everyone, and there's some strain in his relationship. So when he's late for dinner, he takes a shortcut home through the park, where he finds Louis hanging himself over a woman. Louis attaches himself to Antoine, who finds him a job at his restaurant and attempts to fix his life. Of course this involves Antoine meeting Blanche, the woman Louis was killing himself over, and Antoine falls for her too. Hijinx ensue.

This film was very French and very entertaining. Not just anyone can pull off the dark comedy, the love triangles, the bizarre but almost realistic antics. The French are just gifted that way. I enjoyed this one, and I would definitely recommend it.

Rating: 3.5

Serious Moonlight (2009, U.S.)

What an unfortunate movie. I'll just put it out there—I hate Meg Ryan. But my mom wanted to watch this one, so I did. A woman finds out her husband is cheating and planning to leave her, so she does the only sensible thing and duct tapes him to the toilet, telling him she'll let him go only when he loves her again.

It's an interesting concept with only four main characters, but it's like the filmmakers couldn't decided to make it a comedy or a psychological drama, and the combination just leaves an unsettled, unsatisfied feeling. If they hadn't tried so hard or had decided what they were trying to do, it could have been good or even amazing, but it wasn't. Combined with bad acting, it just wasn't great. I did keep in mind that the writer (and probably planned director) was murdered before the film could be made, so maybe she could have made it better, like by not casting Meg Ryan. (She was the one behind Waitress, which was quite good.)

Bottom line, I wouldn't recommend it. Unless you want to make your mother happy.

Rating: 2.5

The Bounty Hunter (2010, U.S.)

Blah, blah, blah. Another romantic comedy with a good idea and a terrible execution.

Milo is a bounty hunter with bad luck, and then he gets an assignment to track down his bail-jumping journalist ex-wife, who's doing a story on a dirty cop murder cover up. They find themselves on the run in a ridiculous, unbelievable adventure.

Look, people. Jennifer Aniston is not a good actress. She never has been, she never will be. She plays the same character over and over again. Rachel Green, Brooke Meyers, Nicole Hurley... they're all the same. (I will say that she was actually excellent in The Good Girl, but that was an exception and not a rule.) Gerard Butler, on the other hand, is a wonderful, wonderful actor. He was the Phantom of the Opera, for crying out loud. And now he's doing crap like The Bounty Hunter and The Ugly Truth. Also he's looking kind of rough. It's just not right.

Rating: 2.5

Gray Matters (2006, U.S.)

I previewed this one to decide whether to add it to the library collection. It's a romantic comedy about Gray and Sam, a brother and sister who are best friends, so in sync that people think they're dating. They decided she'll find a girl for him and he'll find a guy for her. Then they meet Charlie, a girl who's perfect—for both of them. When Sam and Charlie get engaged, Gray eventually realizes that she might be in love with Charlie too.

At one point, Gray is feeling lonely, as she says, "Because I'm never going to be able to walk down the street, holding hands with my partner without the rest of the world giving us a look. And me never have the wedding that I once dreamed of and I may never have children. And one day when I die people will never give as much respect to my grieving lover as if she were my husband." Profound and beautiful words from the lips of Heather Graham in a film billed as a romantic comedy? Incredible.

This was a sweet, touching film; not quite as good as Imagine Me & You, but not bad... What is it about adding the element of homosexuality that makes a romance more realistic? Perhaps it's because it isn't just a case of man and woman doing stupid things before finding each other, but instead women dealing with issues of identity as well. (Side note: why do gay men get the serious movies and gay women get the romantic comedies? Realism versus chick lit?)

I really like this one. It would have been better if they'd gone a bit farther, giving Gray and Charlie the opportunity to have the big conversation so Gray could move on with her life and accept her identity a bit more. But I guess it wouldn't be a romantic comedy then.

Rating: 4.0

Prime (2005, U.S.)

Well, this movie had a great premise. A 37-year-old woman meets and falls in love with a 23-year-old man, which is bad enough. The man turns out to be the son of her therapist, who has unwittingly been encouraging the woman to pursue something with the man in order to work through her intimacy problems.

The execution was terrible. It took the comedy right out of romantic comedy. In fact, it took the romance right out of romantic comedy too. Not even the bloopers were funny, even though I'd had several glasses of wine first. Terrible.

Rating: 2.0

Leap Year (2010, U.S.)

This was one of the best romantic comedies I've seen in a long while, probably because there was more wit... even the slapstick parts were witty.

Basically, Anna (Amy Adams) has a perfect little life. She stages apartments for a living and her boyfriend is a successful cardiologist. However, it seems like they're never going to get married. So she takes the initiative and flies to meet him at a conference in Ireland, the land of her ancestors, where there is a tradition that a woman can propose to her man on one day only—Leap Day. A series of things goes wrong, and somehow she ends up stranded in the middle of nowhere on the coast of Ireland, where she enlists the help of pub owner Declan.

Hilarious antics ensue, and Declan and Anna inevitably fall in love. Duh! I was surprised to find that critics tore this apart, calling its plot recycled and other horrible things. There was great situational comedy, lots of witty jokes, and wow was Matthew Goode fabulous. I've always found Amy Adams hilarious, but Goode stole the show. His performance was so subtle but he had my friend and I giggling out loud the whole time. You have to believe that he's a coastal Irish lad, though he's really from Devon!

Irish scenery speaks for itself. Beautiful.

The only thing I really didn't like about it was how conveniently-ever-after it all ended. Of course, that's not unusual for a romantic comedy, but really. An upscale American girl and a down-on-his-luck Irish guy? We end with them starring dreamily into each other's eyes as the sun sets, but where will they live? How will they make their money? What happens when the credits roll? Anyhow.

Rating: 4.0

Carolina (2003, U.S.)

This was a very sweet, funny, clever movie about family and finding your own identity. Of course, that identity is partially influenced by your family, but partly you.

It's also about finding (and more importantly recognizing) the things that are good for you. What you think you want isn't always what you really want or even need.

Aside from all the sweetness, it was really very funny. The writing was fantastic, truly. A girl who works on a dating show with a best friend who's a straight Jewish man working as a romance writer... brilliant! And anything with Shirley MacLaine is bound to be a winner. I have never known anyone like that woman for a laugh.

Rating: 3.5

Priceless / Hors de prix (2006, France)

This movie could not be more French. A professional mistress mistakes a hotel boy/bartender for a rich man, and all hell breaks loose. Before you know it. he's a professional "kept boy" (for lack of a better term). It is an absolutely charming combination of funny, sexy, and awkward. It was très fun.

Of course, I adore Audrey Tautou. This film gave her the opportunity to look downright sexy, as opposed to her usual adorable. Actually, the adorableness peeked through occasionally, and it worked perfectly for the film. The chemistry between her and Gad Elmaleh, who I really liked.

This is a great movie. If it was an American movie, it would be silly and trashy. As a French movie, it was frothy and fun. Great stuff.

Rating: 4.0

The Ugly Truth (2009, U.S.)

Wow. So this was supposed to come out in April, and I was really disappointed when it didn't. I figured they pushed back the release date to get a new rating. Boy, was I wrong.

I have never seen a movie so full of misogynistic and overly-sexualized jokes. It often bordered on tasteless, but it remained quite funny. It definitely walked a fine line. Even though it might have been a bit much for a "romantic comedy," it was also a breath of fresh air because it was just so different. Let me recommend not watching it if you're very easily offended. (I can be offended fairly easily, and I was *this close* to offense every now and then.) But for most people out there, it's hilarious and I think you'll love it.

Gerard Butler is a b-e-a-utiful man. I'm a little bit biased in his favor, but I can still say that he is an amazing actor, and he was shockingly believeable as a rude, chauvanistic pig. I've never seen him play anything quite like it (although he has done some out there roles). (Side note: he's looking a bit odd these days, like he's gained a lot of weight but just in his face. Well, more like he's been stung repeatedly in the face by bees. Anyway.) Here I go with my bias again, but Katherine Heigl was Katherine Heigl. Really, I do not understand the appeal. She plays the same silly, 2-dimensional, whiny, anorexic little girl in everything. You don't understand why the leading man, even one as shallow as the lead in this flick, would want to be with her. Casting could have been way better on that front.

And then they live conveniently-ever-after. Really, I liked it—but what more is there to say about a romantic comedy?

Rating: 3.5

What Happens in Vegas (2008, U.S.)

Anyone who knows me knows that Ashton Kutcher and Cameron Diaz are on my least favorite actors list. They also know that I'm choosy about romantic comedies, and I never go for stupid ones. So why did I watch this flick? Because I was house sitting and it was on the fancy movie channels and there was nothing better to do.

That being said, it wasn't too terrible. It could have been worse. In fact, the concept was quite good. The biggest problems was the casting, obviously. I imagine that with a wittier (and more tasteful) script and better acting, this could have been a great movie, à la Cary Grant/Katharine Hepburn style romantic comedies. It had that situational/physical/screwball comedy thing kind of going for it, plus a few decent jokes. and again, good concept.

So while it's not a complete waste of time, I wouldn't recommend watching it unless there was something better on.

Rating: 2.5

Confessions of a Shopaholic (2009, U.S.)

I never would have watched this on my own, because I knew I was going to hate it. They were showing it on the airplane, however, so I decided to watch it to kill time. Kill is definitely the right word. I want my time back.

The premise is ridiculous. The characters are shallow, and the actors aren't even that great. The jokes are stupid. They all live happily ever after even though they most certainly do not deserve to.

Absolutely, positively awful. Don't watch it. And that's all I have to say.

Rating: 1.5