Movie Review: Friends with Kids

Given the sheer volume of romantic comedies rolling out of film studios year after year, crafting an original story that is equal parts genuinely funny and honestly moving is a necessary aspiration for any screenwriter.  Jennifer Westfeldt (who already has my respect for taking on writing, directing, AND starring reins for this film) sought to meet that challenge, and she manages to come very, very close.

Friends with Kids is a film about a novel concept, two friends who decide to have the child they both want without all of the romantic nonsense (not to mention the considerable loss of sparks they've witnessed between their married friends), splitting all of the parenting duties right down the middle.  It's an idea that, twenty years ago, would have been unheard of, much less celebrated on film, and ordinarily I'd give Westfeldt serious props for that.  However, the film is just a little too self-congratulatory in terms of its originality, and there are moments when it seems the script compensates for imperfections by simply throwing back to the premise ("hey, remember how crazy the idea of two friends having a kid is?").  As a viewer I could see the places where the writing, trying its utmost to not fall into predictability, veered a little too far into awkwardness and stilted exchanges instead. 

An issue that seems to go hand in hand with this forced notion of originality is the flawed pacing of the film.  Friends with Kids front loads a lot of information and introductions right off the bat, and the first twenty minutes or so feel almost rushed.  And yet later there are moments that drag, moments that had me glancing at my watch (never a good sign) and wondering if we were going to reach the film's conclusion any time soon.  There is no single big chunk or subplot that I would necessarily cut (and maybe that is part of the problem, the front loaded exposition makes a lot of information feel critical), it's more a matter of scenes that go on just a few minutes too long, or exchanges that are drawn out just a bit longer than they need to be.  The film's ending is especially problematic, as after a very dragged out thread of Westfeldt's character being in unrequited love with Adam Scott's character, the relationship is resolved in one of the most abrupt, awkward exchanges I've ever seen, one that leaves you wondering whether it's been too long coming or has happened too fast (it's somehow a strange mix of both).

I realize that given all of this it might sound like I didn't enjoy this film, which isn't true.  As a writer and an amateur studier of screenwriting, I can't watch a film without looking for these flaws, wondering where the story might be tightened or tweaked.  As a moviegoer, though, I left the theater satisfied (and more importantly, completely okay with the $11 I paid to see the film).  What really helps the flaws in the script fly under the radar of most viewers is the performances.  This movie utilizes the notion of an "all-star cast" in a really interesting way.  Scott and Westfeldt, both talented but grievously under-recognized performers, take the lead roles, while superstars like Jon Hamm, Maya Rudolph, and Kristen Wiig fill in the friend circle as background players.  This might sound like a poor casting decision on paper, but what it does is really allow the two leads (and especially Adam Scott) to really shine while providing a strong cushion of support.  Rudolph's uneven marriage with Bridesmaids' Chris O'Dowd was a surprisingly pleasant highlight, especially in scenes where the other characters' relationships were proving far more tense (Hamm and Wiig are fantastic as the couple who slowly grow to hate each other).  Talking about Adam Scott for just a minute more (and hey, we all know I could spend days extolling his virtues as an actor), I think the real feat he accomplishes here is the sympathy he pour into an otherwise flat, asshole character.  I hate Jason--he's a pig, he's astoundingly self-absorbed, and I can't stand when a guy calls a girl "doll" not just constantly, but in complete seriousness.  However, something in what Scott is doing here really does convey a tiny glimmer of goodness underneath all of that, one that doesn't feel forced.

On the whole, this movie sets itself apart by emphasizing the comedy in romantic comedy.  Rather than go for the typical slapstick stuff that might earn a halfhearted laugh, Westfeldt gives us the kind of raunchy humor that, mainly due to films like Bridesmaids, has become acceptable again, especially when paired with a moving story.  Friends with Kids might not be the best rom-com out there, but it is impressive in its pushing to the fringes of what this genre can be, something this generation of moviegoers sorely needs and is (contrary to popular opinion) smart enough to appreciate.

Christmas is All Around: Love Actually, Questions and Curiosities (Pt. 2/2)

As we've already seen in part one, Love Actually has a lot of threads running in just about every direction imaginable.  There are so many nuances, plots, characters, and connections to appreciate, especially if you're a repeat viewer like myself.  Here are some of the things that always come back to me:


The connections:
This may be bordering on unrealistic (London's not that small, after all), but so many of these characters have ties to one another, and half the fun of watching this movie is trying to track all of them.  For example, Karen's brother is Prime Minister David, whose love interest Natalie is next door neighbor to Mia, the slutty secretary hell bent on seducing Snape Harry, who just happens to be married to Karen, who is BFFs with recently-widowed Daniel... You get the idea. 


Unclear connections:
Jamie (Colin Firth) and just about everyone. Juliet, Peter and Mark meet him at the airport in the end, and Sarah seems to be sitting with him at Peter and Juliet's wedding, but his ties to them are unclear-- are they all just friends/acquaintances?

Unrealistic lifestyles: 
We see a lot of the characters at their respective jobs throughout the film, and I have to say, I'm not sure they'd all be able to afford living in central London in, let's face it, some pretty snazzy digs.  Sarah, Harry, Carl and the gang work at what I've determined is either a magazine of some kind, or a non-profit organization (or a magazine for a non-profit, I guess); Juliet appears to maybe be a fashion designer (although she is the most consistently terribly-dressed character in the film); Mark...makes movies, I guess, though he also works in an art gallery?  Anyway, they're all very artsy and eclectic, but I have to wonder how likely it is that so many creative types can swing the ritzy-looking lifestyle they have in this movie.  But then again, maybe a bit of a posh appearance comes with the British accent and the crisp look of London.

Lingering questions:
 Where exactly is Carl from/what is that beautiful accent?

What is ailing Sarah's brother? His few shown behaviors in the film don't seem to point to anything definitive.

What exactly is going on behind the scenes with Harry's affair? When does he actually find the time to sleep with Mia/give her the necklace, etc.?

Are we supposed to be happy for Karen and Harry's apparent reunion at the end?  Because I'm not.  I get staying together for the kids and all, but there's a kind of deep discontent evident in that final exchange that just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Why, exactly, is Colin in this movie?  I mean, it's good for a bit of a laugh, but nearly every other story line teaches a lesson or sends a message about love.  All we learn from Colin's misadventures is that American girls are sluts, and lots of us have Southern accents (usually corresponding with an uptick in sluttiness).

Why does American Joanna (who has the singing voice of a goddess) attend Sam's school in London, especially when she apparently has a home in the U.S.?  I mean, obviously, it allows us to have the almost-too-exciting rush to the airport scene, but other than that, this seems a little strange.

Christmas is All Around: An Ode to 'Love Actually' (Pt.1 of 2)

Some films just don’t hold up with the passage of time.  Their jokes are too topical, their soundtracks are too contemporary, or their stories simply fade as our culture evolves.  But Love Actually continues to hold up year after year, warming hearts and eliciting chuckles even on the hundredth (or thousandth) viewing.  There are many reasons this movie stands the test of time, but I think a few merit discussion, whether you’ve never seen it (you should), or haven’t watched it in a while and want to appreciate it with new eyes.

1.  Christmas without the Saccharin:  Yes, this is a film that takes place at Christmas.  And yes, the film’s most climactic scenes take place on Christmas Eve.  But it also veers away from the typical Christmas film in some respects, refusing to be preachy or overly trite.  Too many Christmas films set out to teach a lesson just in time for the season, or over-emphasize the importance of a particular kind of acceptable family unit with which to pass the holiday.  Love Actually does neither of these things.  In fact, there are several characters (Billy Mack, for one, and Colin Firth’s Jamie, for another) who reject spending Christmas with the people society tells them they should in favor of connecting with the person they each truly care about most.  If that’s not a fantastic message for the 21^st century holidaymaker, I don’t know what is. 

2.  Genuine Performances + Earnest Storytelling:  Sometimes when more “serious” actors appear in a romantic comedy, you can tell that they are performing at less than their usual capacity, phoning it in or, as they might say “just having fun with it.”  Not so with this cast (and it is a large, intimidatingly talented one).  Laura Linney gives a performance that is both lastingly endearing and compelling; Hugh Grant’s David makes the perfect awkward-but-charming politician; and Alan Rickman’s Harry possesses a self-awareness (or lack thereof) that I struggle to comprehend to this day.  And if the performances aren’t enough, the writing and directing shows a dedication to storytelling with integrity, something that is absolutely evident both in the film and its behind-the-scenes features.  Director Richard Curtis put this film together with an intentionality I rarely see in this kind of film, and the payoff is clear.

3.      Something for Everyone:  There really is something for every kind of romantic (and even those who lean more toward the cynical).  You might be looking for a storyline that is both visually hilarious and genuinely cute; I’d refer you to Jack and Judy, who by day serve as stand-ins in various nude scenes in films, but by night are actually shy and somewhat bumbling in their flirtations with each other.  Maybe you’re a fan of adultery stories in films (this is a small demographic, but an existent one nonetheless); then watch Emma Thompson’s Karen get her heart slowly broken as she uncovers evidence of her husband Harry’s affair.  Or perhaps you just like seeing the underdog get what he or she wants the most—if this is the case, you have your pick of stories, from 11-year old Sam’s crush on a classmate, to secretary Natalie’s infatuation with the Prime Minister, to Jamie and Aurelia’s struggle to communicate (literally, they speak 2 different languages).  And there are a few unhappy endings for those of you who crave them:  Andrew Lincoln’s Mark is forced to come to grips with his unrequited love for his best friend’s wife, and Laura Linney’s Sarah allows her own compassion to turn against her, keeping her from the person she loves.

4.      Big Romance:  There are many romantic gestures made by the characters in this film, large and small, elaborately planned and completely impulsive.  And gentlemen, this is where you should be taking notes:  there is a lot to be learned about romance from the men in this film.  I have never watched this movie with another woman and not heard her gush over at least one scene, wishing that her boyfriend/crush/husband would rise to the occasion in such a way.  There are lots to choose from, but perennial favorites include Jamie’s impulsive restaurant proposal, as well as David and Sam’s respective races to reach the girls they love in time for Christmas.  My personal choice for the best gesture goes to Mark, for his final, peacemaking effort with Keira Knightley’s Juliet.  It’s beautiful because he expects absolutely nothing to come of it, yet does it anyway.  I guarantee if a guy showed up on my doorstep with cards like that, I’d probably tackle him.  In the good way, of course.

5.      It’s Still Funny:  This movie came out 8 years ago, and I’ve watched it at least a dozen times each Christmas season since.  Ergo, I have heard all the jokes approximately 10,000 times.  But I still always find something to laugh at, and it’s almost always something different than the last time, because each character brings his or her own brand of humor to the film.  Take Colin, for example:  his entire role in the film is purely somewhat obnoxious comic relief, and it obviously works as a counterbalance to all the melodrama, because I chuckle every single time.  

6.      The Real Star, London:  As a huge Anglophile, my adoration of this film has another dimension entirely.  This movie gives a beautiful view of London all dressed up for the holidays, all twinkling lights and brisk, foggy air.  In my mind, it really couldn’t be set anywhere else and possess the same charm.

7.      All-Star Cast (Really, though):  Let’s just reiterate the list, in case you aren’t aware.  Colin Firth.  Bill Nighy.  Laura Linney.  Hugh Grant.  Liam Neeson.  Emma Thompson.  Alan Rickman.  Andrew Lincoln.  Keira Knightley.  Rodrigo Santoro.  Martin Freeman.  Rowan Atkinson.  January Jones.  Have I made my case yet?

8.      On a Serious Note, the Message:  As Hugh Grant states in the opening narration, this film is first and foremost an attempt to prove that “Love actually is all around.”  This film came out in 2003, a time when the world not only craved but needed such a message, and I honestly don’t think that is something that has changed much in 8 years’ time.  Turn on the news or open the paper and you’ll read almost exclusively about things lacking in love and compassion for our fellow humans.  That doesn’t mean love isn’t there; we’ve just lost sight of where to look for it.  This film is one that attempts to put us back on the right track, and for me it does every single time.  There’s a reason I keep coming back to it, after all, and it’s not just because it warms my heart during my favorite season of the year.