More Contrived, More Mundane, Mad About You Season Three Is Just Good Enough.

The Good: Good initial laughs, Good character development
The Bad: Mundane plots, No DVD bonus features, No great acting.
The Basics: Very average, Mad About You in its third season takes sitcom standard plots and does them just well enough to be remembered and recommended.


The third season of a television show is usually a turning point. In the best shows, it seems like the third season is where the kinks are usually ironed out and the series begins to live up to its potential. In more mediocre shows, the third season seems to be where the writers stagnate and fall back on the standards of the genre (whatever genre the show is) to keep the series going. As I make my way through Mad About You (season one reviewed here, season two reviewed here!), I reached Mad About You Season Three and realized two things. The first is that this was my favorite season when I was watching the show as it progressed and the second was that it was stiflingly average (at best). Now on DVD, the third season of Mad About You is strangely disappointing and it came to a cointoss for me to give it the soft "recommend" I ultimately did.

Mad About You is a romantic comedy series with the married couple Paul and Jamie Buchman, who live in New York City. The show is mostly episodic and in the third season, the circumstances they find themselves in seem far more mundane than original. This season, for example, has the sitcom standard plots of: crazy Thanksgiving where the family pet eats the turkey, the lost trying to find an old place episode, and the reluctant family member gets stuck eulogizing a dead person they truly didn't know. The thing is, Mad About You does all of those plots without any real flair or uniqueness (by contrast, I recall laughing each and every time to Martin Crane finding the store that sold him his beloved shoes when Frasier did the "trying to find an old place" episode).

In the third season of Mad About You, Jamie returns to school after she and Paul have a disastrous trip to New Jersey. The building the Buchmans live in plans to expand, setting off more conflicts with their stuffy neighbors and Jamie delivers a eulogy for her dead uncle. Parties turn into disasters, from Fran's birthday party to Thanksgiving to Paul's annual cursed birthday and Paul's father hands the store down to the next generation. And shortly after Fran reveals she has gone back to the job she and Jamie used to share, Jamie starts her own public relations firm.

But Jamie's newfound freedom and employment cause tensions between her and Paul, from financial to trying to share the same work space. As Paul struggles to find work - a problematic endeavor when he does get projects, like a fifteen minute unedited PBS special - Jamie picks up the slack and the two work to make more time with one another. The Buchmans have to pose as Paul's parents, which leads to a very odd situation where Paul and Jamie make up completely different stories for everyone at a resort and Jamie encounters multiple ex's. Rather oddly, the season not only illustrates the week before Jamie and Paul got married (Mad About You, Parts 1 and 2) and what would have happened had they never met (the season finale "Up In Smoke").

Mad About You in the third season seems very sedate, with the humor being very safe and often predictable. Most of the plots involve the Buchmans going through a fairly normal day, having Paul make a few notes of observational humor and then the main plot turning slightly when the expectations for what was going to happen with their day askew. There is a repetitive sensibility to the third season, both for those who have seen the prior seasons and those who are just watching the third season. It holds up less spectacularly over multiple viewings than I initially recalled.

That said, the characters are likable on Mad About You and the third season does have some interesting moments for them. In the third season, the primary characters are:

Paul Buchman - who hits a dry spell with work until he gets movies, documentaries and competes for a grant. He is in love with Jamie, his wife for (as the season progresses) three years. He is bothered when his father prepares to give up his sporting good's store, but not to him, and he tries to keep Jamie and their dog, Murray, happy,

Jamie Buchman - Her quest to better herself with a new degree quickly gets sublimated when she becomes her own boss and starts her own public relations firm. Enjoying being in charge and discovering she is real good at the job, she hires her friend Fran and one of her clients pushes her together with an ex-boyfriend who has made her into a villain in his comic book series! Jamie tries to get her uncle buried in the winner's circle at the horse track and she argues with Paul about who is better in love. She is also flabbergasted when she swaps purses with her sister, Lisa,

Lisa - Jamie's sister, she is chronically disorganized and flighty. She becomes organized when she ends up with Jamie's purse, though. She has more of a supporting role this season,

Fran - Jamie's best friend and then employee, she has a flirtation with baseball star Sloopy Dunbar. She loans the Buchmans her car to try to help them get on a romantic getaway,

and Ira - Paul's cousin and friend, he is something of a player. He has the in at the track Jamie needs and he becomes the heir apparent to his uncle's store. He hooks the Buchman's building up with illegal cable and finds himself in a battle of wills with a visitor to the Buchman's apartment when neither trusts the other alone there. His ex-wife returns, this time incredibly rich.

In the third season of Mad About You, the actors were in their stride, but they were pretty much there because they had become perfectly comfortable with the characters they were portraying. As a result, there are no truly fantastic performances, just a sense that the actors know who their characters are and what they are doing. This comes into focus in the flashback two-parter Mad About You where both Paul Reiser and Helen Hunt play Paul and Jamie with virtually the same mannerisms and comfort level as they have in the primary narrative. John Pankow, Leila Kenzle and Anne Ramsay all give solid supporting performances, but again nothing that truly stands out as great acting beyond how they initially took on their characters.

On DVD, Mad About You Season Three is another spartan comedy series and there are no bonus features, making it not substantively different from what one would find for the show in syndication.

Ultimately, there are laughs to be had in Mad About You Season Three, but the show is more mundane and obvious as a situational comedy than it is truly special. But, in the pantheon of all comedy, there is just enough to recommend this season.

For the third season of other comedies, please check out my reviews of:
Friends - Season Three
30 Rock - The Complete Third Season
Frasier - Season 3

6/10

For other television reviews, please visit my Television Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013, 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Another One For Syndication: Mad About You Season Two Is Average Television/DVD.

The Good: Some amusing moments, Decent character development
The Bad: Acting is average, Plots are very sitcommy, No DVD bonus features
The Basics: A very average season of television on DVD, Mad About You Season 2 is fun to watch, but hard to recommend buying.


In the rush to bring DVDs to market, I wonder how frequently the market is actually evaluated for the need for such things. Sometimes, there is a clear demand: when Family Guy was taken off the air and fans clamored for the episodes, they illustrated that there was a desire for the DVD sets and new episodes. And the smashing success of Firefly (reviewed here!) was enough to get a feature film on the series made. But, with shows in syndication like Two And A Half Men and Everybody Loves Raymond, where the DVD releases offer little outside what fans see on television, I often find myself wondering why they even bother with a DVD release. Truth be told, I'm there now with the second season of Mad About You, a show I enjoyed while it was on, but when I rewatched it on DVD, I realized I hadn't truly missed the program.

Following the first year of their marriage together, Mad About You Season Two follows the life and times of Jamie and Paul Buchman, a New York City couple who still is getting used to being married and spending their lives together. Paul, a film director, and Jamie, a producer who soon finds herself unemployed, are figuring out their relationship while surrounded by Jamie's friend Fran, her sister Lisa and Paul's cousin Ira. The couple lives in an apartment with their dog, Murray, and continues to discover their love for one another and the struggles that come with being married (except, improbably enough, money issues while living in one of the most expensive cities on Earth).

In the second season of the show, Lisa loses Murray, Paul and Jamie have to endure two months apart where their marriage only comes into play on the weekends and Ira finally gets divorced from his absent wife. Paul and Jamie try to find time to be intimate and one time they do - making a tape in the process - they inadvertently send their sex tape to a studio in place of Paul's latest documentary! They have issues with their families, like Lisa calling Jamie an overbearing sister in a book published by her therapist, Paul's father having a cardiac incident and both Jamie and Paul's mothers getting into a fight.

Throughout the season, there is a conscious decision to not have children between the pair as they focus on their careers and on keeping up their romance with one another. Jamie's career takes a turn when she insults her boss at dinner, not knowing he is seated behind her. Paul's career continues to grow as he is given increasingly better opportunities to pursue. In the process of finding time together, they surprise one another, travel together and debate on philosophies like fate vs. self-determination.

Mad About You seems to be a sitcom which is very sit-commy. In other words, all of the humor truly does seem to come from the situations the pair finds themselves in, like Paul scrambling on Jamie's first day of school to get her registered when he realizes he forgot to mail in the registration materials. The situations are often laughable, as is the body language of lead actors Paul Reiser and Helen Hunt. The show looks good, but the characters only have minimal development over the course of the season, so this is more a show about the situations the pair finds themselves in.

To wit, after rewatching the second season, none of the writing stands out for me. My partner and I have watched hundreds of hours of television since we first watched the second season of Frasier (reviewed here!) together, but I can still say "Dad wanted to tell you, but I won the coin toss" and we both burst out laughing because we recall the exact episode and circumstances that quote comes from. But even after immediately concluding the second season of Mad About You, there were no lines that were as sharp, clever or funny that evoked laughter from us. Instead, this is a comedy I found myself smiling at more than actually laughing out loud with.

Even so, it helps to know the trials and tribulations of the main characters to make a decision about whether or not this season is for you. And in the second season of Mad About You, the principle characters are:

Paul Buchman - After squeezing in time to make love with Jamie, he misses taking his nephew out for Halloween because of his shooting schedule. He takes on a problematic producer and ends up getting a job in Chicago for two months. He becomes curious about mortality when another Paul Buchman dies and he debates how his relationship with Jamie was (or not) preordained,

Jamie Buchman - Is thrilled to try to earn points with Sylvia (Paul's mother) when Paul's father has a heart attack. She squabbles with Lisa, especially over her place in Lisa's therapist's book and she gives Paul a haircut - and edits one of his films - while bored. She believes it was fate that brought her and Paul together,

Lisa - Loses Murray and gets referenced (under a pseudonym) in her therapist's book. She plays her mother and Paul's against each other for her benefit and she actually comes to Paul's aid when Paul forgets to put in Jamie's registration forms,

Fran - No longer with her husband, she finds herself shocked when she is late and who she hooked up with to get that way surprises everyone! She remains friends with both Paul and Jamie,

and Ira - Able to treat Paul, Jamie and Fran to a weekend in Atlantic City - which is a ruse by his wife to get him to sign divorce papers, he drifts. He gets Paul interested in virtual reality through a simulation involving Christie Brinkley. And he begins a relationship with Fran which gives him a chance to grow some.

But, more often than not, Mad About You in its second season is about the situations the characters fall into and how they become resolved, as opposed to excessively evolving the characters. So, for example, Lisa is as unobservant and self-absorbed in "Murray's Tale" (where she returns from walking Murray with a completely different dog) as she is in the season finale. This is not to say some of the plots are not hilarious, because "Disorientation" is actually very funny. But even by this season, the show feels like it is going with cliche plots for romantic comedies involving couples, like "Paul Is Dead" where another Paul Buchman dies (it's been done on virtually every sitcom) and "Love Letters" where the couple finds letters between a couple whose romance mirrors their own.

The acting in Mad About You Season Two is good, but none of the principles expand upon what we've already seen as their range in this season. As a result, watching this season feels more like returning to good friends, as opposed to watching something truly new.

On DVD, there are no bonus features, so fans do not get anything they do not already get through seeing the syndicated versions of the episodes.

Ultimately, Mad About You is very average in its second season and those who love sitcom television will find it amusing, even if not enduring.

For other works featuring John Pankos, please check out my reviews of:
Morning Glory
Bride Wars
Mad About You - Season 1

5/10

For other television reviews, please check out my Television Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013, 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Take It Or Leave It Television Volume 1: Mad About You Season 1 On DVD

The Good: Charming, Decent guest starring bits, Decent acting
The Bad: No DVD bonus features, Seems to need the laugh track
The Basics: Mad About You Season 1 gives nothing the syndicated version of the show doesn’t have, but is a good enough romantic comedy that television fans will find something to like.


In the history of the sitcom, I can think of several shows that I watched fairly religiously while they were on the air, but I have absolutely no need to buy on DVD. Arguably at the top of that list would be Mad About You, a show I caught in college in syndication and recently rewatched the first season of on DVD. In rewatching the first, I was struck by how remarkably, overwhelmingly average the show truly was and how little it appealed to me now. For sure, I enjoyed it; Mad About You is a sitcom which peaks early and then dies a slow, long death. So, returning to season one, was like returning to the glory days of a good friendship.

The other thing that stood out for me with rewatching the first season of Mad About You on DVD was how dependent the show seemed to be on the laugh track. My appreciation of shows like Sports Night (reviewed here!) where the show was thrown off by the laugh track (the pacing of the verbal jokes resisted the laugh track) and the success of the humor of animated shows like The Simpsons (season eight reviewed here!) made the laugh track on this live-action sitcom stand out and pretty much scream at me now. In fact, it was weird watching a show where performers waited for the laughs to die before moving on and it struck me as wholly inorganic in this season.

Newlyweds Paul and Jamie Buchman – a film student/director and a producer – are living in New York City (Manhattan) where they work to make time for one another and live through the foibles that result from their miscommunications. This starts with a night alone where both Jamie and Paul forget to cancel prior engagements they had and instead try to squeeze everyone into one night. Because their marriage is still new, they fumble through things like their first major purchase together (in this case buying a sofa) and Paul getting rid of his original apartment which he had only sublet (in this case to Kramer from Seinfeld).

As the season goes on, Paul and Jamie stumble through an extended visit by Jamie’s parents, a maid who has a thing for Paul and Jamie getting annoyed when Paul is not jealous over the new housepainter, who happens to be an ex-boyfriend of Jamie’s. The two struggle when one of Paul’s documentaries is rejected on the same day Jamie gets the funding to produce her next project and they come together sadly when their friends Fran and Mark split up while visiting their apartment. But as their first anniversary rushes closer, it is clear the two are very much in love.

Mad About You is a romantic comedy about love after marriage and it works fairly well. Jamie gets nervous, Paul is levelheaded, but talks off on weird tangents, but it soon becomes apparent that the bond between the two is exceptionally strong. Mad About You in its first season is more often than not a standard romantic comedy which follows a formula where Jamie and Paul have a plan, something comes up and they scramble to fix the problem. They do not so much learn and grow and ironically, the only two real long-term consequences that come out of the first season’s episodes are the split between Mark and Fran and the coming together of Paul and Jamie (which happens midseason as a flashback episode).

This is not to say the show is without charm. It has charm and it even has some originality to it. On Valentine’s Day, Paul and Jamie find themselves locked in their bathroom together and they bond while surviving on antacids and painting toenails (“Love Among The Tiles”). But more often than not, episodes are like “Sunday Times” where Paul and Jamie try to figure out what they might do on a Sunday together before visiting friends and the end of the day decide for them. In the end, the viewer ends up feeling somewhat cheated because nothing truly happens.

The show succeeds as much as it does, then, because of the verbal humor. Paul is a funny guy, played by Paul Reiser. Jamie, played by Helen Hunt, acts more often than not as a straightman to Paul’s absurd gesticulations and her humor is quieter. They both play well off Anne Ramsay’s Lisa (Jamie’s sister), who stops by frequently and has a dry sense of humor and a darker worldview.

Like most good sitcoms, what separates Mad About You from every other sitcom on the air are the characters. In the first season, the principle characters are:

Paul Buchman – A film director and creator, he makes documentaries. He works hard, but is most accomplished with keeping Jamie happy. For Paul, it was love at first sight and now he is working to make the rest of his dreams come true. He finds it difficult to take orders from Jamie when she has the chance to hire him for a project,

Jamie Buchman – Paul’s wife, she is quietly neurotic about change and surprises. She likes things planned, is very organized and gets stressed when things diverge from the plan. Paul has a calming influence on her. She is more amused than annoyed when the maid falls for Paul, but is irked when Paul does not get jealous about her ex-boyfriend painting the apartment,

Lisa Stemple – Jamie’s sister, she is vocally neurotic and takes a while to warm to Paul. She has a friendship with Selby that takes a turn for the uncomfortable on Thanksgiving. She is happy to help Jamie look good for their parents for money (by making herself look bad to them),

Fran Devanow – Paul and Jamie’s friend, she is the controlling wife of Mark who is very unhappy most of the time,

Mark Devanow – Fran’s milquetoast husband, he is a dentist who she basically has to program. Unable to keep her happy, he leaves,

Ira Buchman – Paul’s cousin, he is somewhat shifty, but a generally good guy. He’s friendly, outgoing and he tends to get Paul into more trouble than he keeps him out of,

And Jay Selby – He shows up for a few episodes, comes to Thanksgiving and disappears from the series.

The show features a hilarious recurring role for Steven Wright (Warren the camera man) in the latter half of the season, but largely the show it tight on Paul, Jamie, Fran, Lisa and Mark the first season.

Unfortunately, in this season, there are no DVD bonus features, so it is tough to recommend this as opposed to just catching it in syndication. There’s just enough charm to it for this season, though. Anyone who is looking for a very typical, generally feel-good romantic comedy will find something to enjoy in the first season of Mad About You.

For other situational comedies, please check out my reviews of:
Cheers
Ally McBeal
Dharma & Greg - Season 1

6/10

For other television reviews, please visit my Television Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013, 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Bobby: Another Big Cast Movie I Wanted To Like More

The Good: Awesome cast, Some decent acting, Some interesting characters, DVD extras
The Bad: Most of the characters are not developed enough, Use of archival footage/direction
The Basics: Awkwardly combining archived footage and newly directed material, the fateful day of RFK's primary victory in California is recreated in a painstaking and painful way.


Sometimes movies that have huge casts know how to use those big casts. They wow the audience with their performances with sheer force of numbers. So, for example, critics often overlook the magnificent Cradle Will Rock (reviewed here!) because the caliber of the actors in it is so high as to overwhelm the audience and for as hard as I was on Mystic River (reviewed here!), the main reason was because all of the actors were so extraordinary that their performances only lived up to the high expectations of greatness from such a group. In fact, the last movie I saw with a massive, well-known cast that truly disappointed me was A Prairie Home Companion (reviewed here!). And then there was Bobby, a film I was excited about and just caught on DVD.

On June 6th, 1968 in Los Angeles California, the California primary is heating up as a contest between Senator Robert F. Kennedy and Senator McCarthy and the victory speech for RFK is set for that night at the Ambassador Hotel. As the day progresses, workers, performers and patrons of the Ambassador Hotel prepare for the arrival of Kennedy and there are numerous conflicts and collisions that occur, prompting actions and reactions. The people spending the day going about their lives include kitchen help, notably Jose and Miguel - Latino workers compelled to work a double shift - and black chef Edward Robinson. When Timmons fails to allow the workers to go vote, his boss Paul fires him. Paul is not having the best day as this is the day he and his mistress, Angela, part ways and his wife Miriam finds out about his indiscretion. Retired doorman John Casey sits in the lounge playing chess with those who will play with him, like Nelson. In the hotel's lounge, Virginia Fallon is set to give her final performance and leave town after introducing RFK.

Outside the immediate politics of the hotel, though still encompassed within the walls of the structure, there are a number of personal and political machinations at work. Fallon's husband Tim has chosen this day to leave Virginia. The establishment is overrun with campaign workers for Robert F. Kennedy, like Jimmy and Cooper who spend the day getting high instead of working. They get LSD from Fisher and spend the day tripping. This is unlike Wade and Dwayne, who have spent the day working to create a victory for RFK in the primary. This is the day that Diane is marrying William so he will be sent to Germany instead of Vietnam. It is also the day RFK supporters Jack and Samantha arrive to see the future president.

The recent success of such movies as Crash (reviewed here!) that employ large casts with characters involved in intertwining storylines have encouraged other writers and directors to explore the same with their own ideas. Bobby is written and directed by Emilio Estevez, who also appears in the movie as Tim Fallon. The problem here is that while Estevez certainly captures the chaos and scope of the Ambassador Hotel on that June day, the character elements are sacrificed to fit all of the stories in.

In short, because there are essentially twenty one integral characters (none of whom are Bobby Kennedy) with at least three other recurring characters that try to squeeze in for time, none of them have the chance to fully develop and be explored. Instead, they are almost all given the short run of screentime.

Which leads me to one of the biggest criticisms of Bobby; the title. Titles, any writer will tell you, are incredibly important and Bobby is a misnomer. This is not a film about Robert F. Kennedy. While it certainly does tell the story of one of the most fateful days in American history, it almost completely neglects the real stories of Robert F. Kennedy's day. This is a story about the Ambassador Hotel, building up to RFK's arrival, it's not about Bobby Kennedy. Certainly everyone in the hotel is there directly or indirectly because of Kennedy, but he is an ancillary character in the story.

Moreover, Kennedy appears in the film through use of historical clips, many from news reports using archive footage. Kennedy, Mike Wallace and another news anchor appear in grainy clips that illustrate the reality of the day. Unfortunately, Estevez combines these clips with the main footage of the movie, pulling the viewer out of narrative as he tells it. Instead of relegating the quotes and clips with RFK to a prologue and epilogue, Bobby uses footage throughout that integrates poorly with the actual movie.

Nowhere is this more problematic than near the climax of the film. While Kennedy is on stage in clips that are wonderfully restored for the film, he is flanked by historical figures who the viewer have been watching for the past hour and a half. Yes, Estevez clumsily integrates footage that includes the real Wade - for example - and for those looking at the continuity, this is a terrible attempt to reconcile the movie with itself. To make clear, Estevez uses footage from reality and tries to put it into the movie, usually when RFK is involved and the footage does not match in terms of quality nor composition, making the movie very poorly assembled in the end.

Estevez should have used his RFK stand in Dave Fraunces - or found another actor - to recreate RFK footage for the movie as opposed to sloppily sticking in old clips.

That said, what we do see about the various characters is enough to make this film work at least one viewing. The dialogue between Jose, Miguel and Edward is phenomenal. Rarely in American cinema is there discussion of interethnic dynamics that calls it as it sees it, documenting the tensions between blacks and latinos. Edward's conversation about how he lost his anger is amazing and very compelling. Despite how little screentime he has, he resonates as a worthwhile and intriguing character.

Similarly, the weird relationship between soon-to-be-spouses Diane and William is awkward, stilted and in every way wonderful. When Diane quietly declares that she would have married the two people from her high school that recently were killed in Vietnam if it would have saved their lives is telling and sad. William's understanding that Diane's willingness to marry him is not necessarily based on love is sad and touching.

The character that is most developed and least overstated is John Casey, the former doorman. He is quite simply lonely and retired, occupying a couch in the lobby playing chess in order to stave off utter loneliness and lethargy. His mind is sharp and he has wonderful memories of the Ambassador Hotel, but he is a man who had nowhere to go in retirement and ends up desperate for any interaction with people.

Casey is played with wonderful simplicity by Sir Anthony Hopkins. Hopkins has one of his most understated roles here and he creates a character with both quiet dignity and desperation as he waits for the day to end. I've never seen Hopkins played bewildered as well as he does in the climax of this film.

Sadly, most of the other actors do not have the chance to shine as much as they deserve. Almost completely neglected is Martin Sheen whose bit part in Bobby makes the viewer wonder why he took it (though supporting his son is a good enough reason for me!). And while Laurence Fishburne is wonderfully cast as Edward Robinson, his performance is nothing we have not seen from him in, say, The Matrix. He plays the sage quite well, but here he does nothing to impress the viewer with his range.

Neglected even more is one of my favorites, William H. Macy, who wowed me in Magnolia (reviewed here!). Macy plays the hotel's manager, Paul and his role is little more than a cameo at key moments, a clear underuse of his talents. Also appearing with minimal screentime are Elijah Wood, Lindsay Lohan, Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Emilio Estevez. And while it's wonderful to see Freddy Rodriguez in a film, his part is nothing terribly challenging or different from his signature role in Six Feet Under.

I will note that Joshua Jackson stood out as Wade. Jackson has a seriousness to him that allows him to perfectly embody a young aide to a politician. He seems like a manager and he has a dignity that I would not have anticipated from him.

On the DVD presentation, one of the coolest features is a panel discussion with people who were actually at the Ambassador Hotel the night in question. Their conversation is insightful and it has a strength to it that wonderfully tells the story of reality from a different perspective after Estevez's production is over.

It is only the strength of what is revealed by characters in what little time they are given, combined with the strength of the acting when the actors are permitted to present their talents and the decent DVD bonuses that save this otherwise mediocre film. Sadly, while I watched, I continued to wait for it to become extraordinary and was a little let down when the best it achieved was adequate. Recommended for a viewing, as opposed to purchasing for a permanent collection.

For other works with Freddy Rodriguez, check out my takes on:
Six Feet Under
Havoc
Payback

6/10

For other film reviews, be sure to check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

A Saga Of Scarlett Johansson Continues With Oscar Wilde's A Good Woman

The Good: Great lines, Some decent performances, Great direction
The Bad: Characters and plot rather standard, Some flat performances
The Basics: With amusing wit and little character development, Mike Barker's A Good Woman does its best with Oscar Wilde's play for an entertaining evening.


In my review of In Good Company (here!), I came to realize that despite understanding the appeal of Scarlett Johansson, I've yet to see her in anything where her performance has wowed me. So, I sat down with the film A Good Woman to continue my quest to be impressed by Johansson. My quest continues . . .

Meg Windermere is twenty and married to Robert, and together on holiday in 1930s Italy they prepare for Meg's twenty-first birthday. Robert soon runs into the notorious Mrs. Erlynne, a woman who has a habit of living off other women's husbands. Rumors soon begin to fly that Robert is involved with Mrs. Erlynne, even as a kinder older gentleman named Tuppy pursues Mrs. Erlynne out of love.

A Good Woman is adapted from Oscar Wilde's play by Howard Himelstein and directed by Mike Barker. Barker is excellent in his direction on the film, emphasizing aspects of character and plot that would be difficult - if not impossible - to convey through a play. So, for example, during a critical scene involving a checkbook, Barker keeps the camera focused on the ledger and the details of the ledger, which is using the medium very well. Barker plays with such details for maximum impact and it works.

The thing is, the movie is still Oscar Wilde fare and that means two things. The first is that Wilde was obsessed with people and gossip and socialites and it's a very different world from the one most of us live in. Those not part of "society" tend to find the pretenses and machinations pretentious at best, silly at worst. Throughout the film there are gossips who are telling the audience what society is saying, in the form of the Countess Lucchino and Tuppy's friends (who are reminiscent of Statler and Waldorf of The Muppet Show). In A Good Woman, these characters are more annoying than helpful because director Mike Barker makes clear by showing all that they would tell. In addition to appearing superfluous, they slow down the movie and weaken any emotional resonance of the main characters. They are an annoying distraction.

The second problem most viewers will run into is the language of Oscar Wilde. Wilde was a genius of observation and wit. It's almost impossible to deny that few could quip better than Wilde. The problem is, it doesn't make for coherent dialogue. While this is a period film and one might expect some archaic dialogue, viewers ought to know that - even in his time - no one talks like they do in a Wilde play. So, for those who watch the film and think that every line is going over their head, that's not necessarily you, well it might be YOU, but in general, it's Wilde. Wilde is brilliant with observations, weak on stringing them together into coherent lines of dialogue.

So, for example, great lines in A Good Woman include such observations as "I like America. Name me another society that's gone from barbarism to decadence with bothering to create a civilization in between" (Darlington). This is responded to by Tuppy, who returns, "A tribute to American efficiency." Conversation done. Wilde makes great observations and delightful rejoinders, but the average conversation in A Good Woman is three to five lines long.

That's a problem from the script up and as a result, a lot of the characters seem awkward. In life, we're used to conversations that happen with real exchanges. They take time, they develop. In A Good Woman, everyone is a wit and that's mostly all they exchange. When Mrs. Erlynne begins to truly open up with Robert, it is almost entirely for plot exposition and filling in backstory. It also comes far too late in the movie for most of us to care.

Scarlett Johansson is adequate as Meg. I'm looking for more than adequate from Johansson. She gets around all of the awkward dialogue written for her, but her performance still seems stiff. I recognize that she is playing a young woman and someone who is overly concerned with what society thinks, but there's no zest, no spark in Johansson's performance that makes her feel real or human. Or like her character has real potential to grow.

Mark Umbers, who plays Robert is even flatter. His performance is downright bland.

Conversely, the two senior members of the main cast make the film worth the recommend. Tom Wilkinson, who supplied perhaps the only truly decent performance in the terrible The Last Kiss (reviewed here!), is wonderful as Tuppy. Wilkinson has the spark in the eye, the wistful quality to the voice and stance that sell us on the idea of the aging divorcee who wants to give marriage another try. Wilkinson steals every scene he's in.

Helen Hunt leads the cast as Mrs. Erlynne, which relieves the viewer of the question of "Whatever happened to Helen Hunt?" Hunt is great as Erlynne, subtly playing a role that could be flamboyant and garish. Instead, she is understated, clever and a real pleasure to watch. Hunt has charm that is essential to convincing the audience of the reality of her character. In A Good Woman, she displays that charm with expert grace.

Ultimately, A Good Woman is a fun movie, though typically Wilde. The lines are good, even if they are somewhat disjointed and prevent genuine character development. The costumes are decent and while I would not buy this for my permanent collection, it's certainly worth a viewing. Just don't look to it to sell Scarlett Johansson.

For other works featuring Helen Hunt, check out my reviews of:
What Women Want
Pay It Forward
As Good As It Gets

7/10

For other film reviews, be sure to check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Almost As Good As A Film Could Be: As Good As It Gets!

The Good: Amusing, Good acting, Interesting characters, Less than predictable plot
The Bad: Nothing major, Elements of predictability
The Basics: Entertaining, emotional and witty, As Good As It Gets comes close to a perfect comedy by not trying to be unnecessarily funny.


As Good As It Gets is an attempt to make a romantic comedy into something more and something different. It succeeds at the former and almost makes it as the latter. Were it not for the very end of the film and minutiae throughout, As Good As It Gets could live up to its title.

Melvin Udall is a novelist of apparently some success and import. He's obsessive compulsive and probably a hypochondriac. He is determined not to step on cracks in the sidewalk or any surface he walks on, creates an orderly environment where he writes his works and the hypochondria is evident in his obsession with germs and his bringing his own plasticware to the restaurant he habitually dines in.

Being such a pain, only one person in the restaurant who can stand - or handle - Melvin is Carol. Carol puts up with Melvin and they get on despite Melvin's crass remarks. Melvin also offends his neighbor Simon with his open homophobia and ethnic prejudice. The film's action is simple: Melvin offends Carol with a comment about her ailing son and Simon gets mugged. He gets beat up seriously. Melvin is compelled to take care of Simon's dog and in the process, Melvin extends kindness to Carol by getting health care for her ailing son.

The film hinges on the use of the characters around the protagonist. Melvin is an unlikable protagonist and he is surrounded by good and vibrant people. Carol is a wonderful character, Simon is well defined and interesting. He is crushed physically and emotionally throughout the film and it is through Simon that the film becomes something more than a romantic comedy. He's not funny, he's real and that in itself is wonderful.

The minutiae that keep the film from perfection are in Melvin. So much of the film is gotten right with him: he's a germophobe and has a stainless steel refrigerator, he leaves a restaurant with a dress code rather than wear the provided common outfit. And yet, his transformation does not read right in the time frame. While I believe the power of unconditional love is great, but it does not undo at least forty years of prejudice and inconsiderate behavior. And while the argument may be made that Melvin's kindness to Carol and her son is self-serving, it's a weak argument.

The flaw with the end is that, after all the ways the remainder of the film defies the expectation of a romantic comedy, it does not live up to our expectations that the film will continue to challenge us in its resolution.

What works is that - even with the character flaws in the arc of Melvin - the acting is consistently great. Jack Nicholson is wonderful and sardonic as Melvin. Helen Hunt - between this and Pay It Forward (reviewed here!) - proves she can play well a character quite different from herself. Wonderful! Greg Kinnear plays Simon wonderfully with depth that is lacking from so many characters in today's works. Cuba Gooding Jr. performs well as Simon's partner.

When As Good As It Gets attempts humor, it succeeds, when it tries serious and deep, it excels. This film is perfect for those who enjoyed the short-lived series Sports Night (reviewed here!) and is a fine choice for anyone who wants more of their comedies than funny and predictable.

For other works with Jack Nicholson, please visit my reviews of:
The Departed
Terms Of Endearment
One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest

9/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2007, 2002 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Simply Entertaining, What Women Want Works!

The Good: Funny, Good acting, Entertaining, Writing
The Bad: Pacing, 99% Predictable
The Basics: While less-compellingly delivered than had it been a drama, this romantic comedy works at taking an old concept and making it bearable to watch again.


What Women Want is an absurdly-conceived film saved solely by most of the acting and the writing. It's a predictable romantic comedy that takes a hugely contrived premise and then beats it into the ground. The saving grace: it does it well. One of the older schools of Modernist thought is that everything has already been said. Every story that can possibly be told has already been told, that's the theory. Given that, the key now is either doing the story that is done very well or making the old thing seem new. What Women Want does a little of both and for the most part, it succeeds as such.

What Women Want follows advertising executive Nick Marshall dealing with the fact that he's a sexist, chauvinistic suit who suddenly finds himself having to take women seriously. This comes in the form of him being passed over for promotion to Creative Director of the ad agency he works for when the importance of female consumer dollars in realized and Darcy McGuire gets the job instead. Nick is determined to sink Darcy and get the job for himself when he electrocutes himself. This gives him, tacky as it is to say, the super power ability to read the minds of women. After a ridiculously quick understanding of this gift, Nick decides to use this ability to meet his goal by reading Darcy's thoughts and anticipating her campaigns.

What Women Want is a comedy. To that end, it's funny. Mel Gibson actually brings humor to Nick Marshall and Alan Alda is wonderful as his boss, Dan. A lot of the overt stuff, like Nick trying on control top panty hose is good for a brief smile and some of the stuff intended to be funny, like the fact that Nick can read the thoughts of a poodle, falls flat. The shining moments are the subtle humors. Morgan, Nick's best friend, provides quite a bit of the film's humor. The thing is, the film would have been vastly better as a drama. It's hard for people to take an idea they've seen (especially that they like) and challenge it. What Women Want would have been vastly better as a drama of one of two types: Had Nick been granted the power he received and not understood it and it destroyed him (imagine suddenly reading a single unfiltered mind, much less those of all women!) or Nick gained his power, uses it against Darcy and the effect such has on him in the negative growth direction. Essentially, Nick is using his power for a bad purpose in the film, playing with that and what it means would have made for a far far better story. Apparently, comedies are what sell for this, though.

The problem, though, is that character, the most important aspect of the story, suffers. Nick doesn't read right. I mean, basically, he's a pig at the beginning of the film. That's fine, he was raised to be one. That the ability to read women's minds suddenly makes him more understanding is ridiculous. At one point in the film, Nick uses his powers to understand a woman he is pursuing sexually. Basically, he commits the ultimate manipulation of her and that was in character. The question is, why would simply knowing women's thoughts suddenly, realistically, change Nick? Unless he's been going through life with the understanding that women don't think, obviously he wouldn't.

Outside Nick, the other characters in the film are interesting and realistic. They each have their wants and needs and they read as real people in that way. Darcy, especially, has the feel of being a real individual.

The acting overall is good. Especially the young talent. Sarah Paulson and Judy Greer play Annie and Erin with scene-stealing precision. They're better than just eye candy, they're people acting and they do it well.

The moment Nick gets his power and goes to the office, the rest of the plot becomes predictable. In all honesty, I called most all of the rest of the film in that scene. The problem is some of it doesn't make sense. The best example I can give is Nick's brief relationship with Lola. After he is pronounced a sex god, he doesn't call her for six days. That makes sense if he's the pig from the beginning, because then he doesn't care about gratifying her, he's fine in that he accomplished it once, but not in the developing character that works so hard to satisfy her. Even that isn't such a big deal because it allows the vastly more predictable main plot to progress.

Despite its faults, the writing is there. The lines are well written and they tend to be well delivered. It's not the brain surgery of film making; it's entertainment and it accomplishes that. Every once and a while, even I am able to appreciate a film that does just that.

For other romantic comedies, please check out my reviews of:
Crazy Stupid Love.
Friends With Benefits
Date Night

6/10

For other film reviews, click here to visit my index page which has the reviews organized by movie title!

© 2011, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

What's Not To Like About This Film? Pay It Forward!

The Good: Engaging, The ACTING!, Character development, Pacing
The Bad: Janeane Garofalo ruined the end when she was on The Daily Show!
The Basics: Wonderful actors playing engaging and empathetic characters, what more could a viewer ask for than Pay It Forward?


Every now and then I write a review that is cut and dry: direct, explicit and somewhat shorter than my usual fare. My review for Pay It Forward will be one of those for the same reason I ever write a short review: sometimes, things don't need to be spelled out more than they need to be. It's like the word "sad;" there are a thousand times "miserable," "disagreeable," "uncomfortable," and "gloomy" might be used, but sometimes "sad" is the perfect word to describe the mood or person or event. Saying more is not necessary,

That said, the only two faults I can find with Pay It Forward are that Jon Bon Jovi appears in the credits and Janeane Garofalo appeared on The Daily Show once and mentioned how the film ended. The only problem with our man Bon Jovi appearing in the opening credits is then we're waiting for him. His late entry into the film could have been even better had it been a surprise. And as for Janeane Garofalo, she was excellent in The Truth About Cats and Dogs, so I'll forgive her. This time.

That said, Pay It Forward follows the philosophy of a seventh grader: Trevor believes if you do something big to help out three people and they pay that favor forward, do something nice in turn to three other people, the world can be a better place. That it's idealistic is covered in the film; that's what the film is about. While he's practicing this, reporter Chris Chandler is tracing the "Pay It Forward Movement" back to Trevor from four months after the boy began his plan. I originally found Chris' part distracting, but it came together and it worked.

Trevor is played by the no doubt soon to be multiple award winning Haley Joel Osment. He's accompanied by the always fabulous Kevin Spacey, who expertly plays the scarred Eugene Simonet. Helen Hunt rounds out the main cast as Trevor's mom, who finds herself - by Trevor's designs - attracted to Eugene.

Okay, here's the thing: the film sounds contrived. It sounds like a movie trying to sell a philosophy, but instead, it's just a story. And a good one. It's well executed. Eugene Simonet has disfiguring scars. We, the viewer, know at some point, their cause is going to be revealed. We know he brings issues to the film. The thing is, Pay It Forward does it well. The revelation comes at an appropriate time that, while it is plot-convenient, doesn't feel plot driven. The characters move the film from beginning to end and despite the way it sounds, it's well worth your time and attention.

There's nothing I could say that would articulate that fraction off perfection I feel when there is so much to recommend the film. Besides, even after the first viewing, I am almost positive Pay It Forward would remain strong on repeated viewings. After all, Janeane told me the ending and I still am rating it high!

For other films with Kevin Spacey, please check out my takes on:
Horrible Bosses
The Men Who Stare At Goats
Superman Returns
American Beauty
L.A. Confidential
Glengarry Glen Ross

9.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |