The Intern Fails To Sell.

The Good: Decent acting, Good direction, Good casting choices
The Bad: Painfully troubling plot and character moments, Pacing
The Basics: Anyone hoping for a one-two punch of Robert De Niro and Anne Hathaway is likely to be disappointed by how they are utilized in The Intern.


Whenever I review a film that stars Anne Hathaway, I worry that I am being too soft on the film based on my appreciation of Anne Hathaway as an actress and activist. There are few actors who sell me on a project simply by their presence in it (writers and directors tend to impress me more; without quality in their departments, it doesn't matter who the players are!), but Anne Hathaway is definitely one who I shell out money to see whenever she opens a movie. In the case of The Intern, I actually considered spending the $1500 (plus travel expenses) that it would have cost to get into the New York Premiere for the film on the hopes of rubbing elbows with Hathaway. After spending the day out at the nearest theater playing it, 40 miles away, I'm glad that I did not spend more on The Intern.

The Intern is the latest dramedy by Nancy Meyers, whose last film It's Complicated (reviewed here!) was brilliant and incredibly well-executed. At this point in her career, Nancy Meyers can do whatever she wants and it is easy to see why Robert De Niro, Anne Hathaway, Rene Russo and the rest of the cast was excited to work with her. Nancy Meyers is a legend, but The Intern makes the argument well that when some people get to "legendary" status, people do not have the heart to tell them when their projects are dramatically less-than what they have produced before.

The Intern does not suck, but watching it was a joyless experience, one packed with so much "stuff," and one that confounds the viewer with its glaring plot and character problems. Or, perhaps, Nancy Meyers really is writing for all the stupid people out there; I was somewhat surprised when Jules's (the character played by Hathaway) husband appeared on screen and the people in the theater I was in gasped - Meyers showed Jules's ringed left hand prominently on screen at least three times before Matt appeared. But, given that Meyers has a history of writing smart, complicated characters and situations, I think it is reasonable to expect that The Intern would be smart. Alas, it is not.

Ben Whittaker is a widower who has been on his own for years and at age 70 feels like he has done everything. Searching for a purpose in life, he applies to be a Senior Intern at About The Fit, an online clothing store. Despite her protestations, the head of the company, Jules Ostin, takes Whittaker on as her own intern. After spending a time at ATF not being utilized, Ben starts to pick up random slack around the crowded office and make an impression on his coworkers. When he sees Mike, Jules's driver, drinking during the work day, he replaces Mike and begins to integrate himself more and more into Jules's life.

Jules is under a tremendous amount of stress. Cameron, who initiated the Senior Intern Program, has advised Jules that the investors in ATF are getting wary at the pace at which the company is moving and they want Jules to bring on a CEO. Not eager to make someone else her boss, Jules very reluctantly begins to take interviews for the CEO position. At the same time, Jules's marriage to Matt - who was in a similar field and was more successful, but became a stay-at-home-dad when Jules gave birth to Paige - is strained. While Jules tries to juggle her personal and professional lives, she comes to rely on Ben more and more for guidance, while he finds purpose as her trusted adviser.

First, what's good. Nancy Meyers captures very well the sense of discontent and loss for a man who was happily married for forty-two years and then lost both his wife and his career (Whittaker was in the phone book publication business!). The Intern begins with an almost crushing sense of mood and when Whittaker is put off on his first day until 3:55 to meet the person he is interning with, the sense that his life has become useless is pounded home. Meyers does a decent job of instantly characterizing Whittaker as a man who truly has a need to be back in the workforce to derive a sense of purpose. And Robert De Niro does a fine job of portraying that. Similarly, Anne Hathaway manages to find the right balance for Jules between strong and efficient and vulnerable and human.

The problem is that the film tries to pack so much more in and one has to neglect some pretty huge problems to make the characters truly seem realistic or workable. At the top of the list is Jules. To buy Jules and the radical take-off of ATF one has to buy the vastly understated premise that eighteen months before the film began, Jules was not throwing all of the energy and focus she had into raising Paige. What?! Jules is devoted, focused, and a micromanager. Her company is relatively new and while I am not at all an expert on children, Paige is ridiculously young - like Pre-school age. While The Intern pays lip service to the idea that Matt was immensely successful in his field and gave it up so Jules could follow her dream and that Jules had the whole idea that women coming home to a bottle of wine each night could be a goldmine for online shopping . . . the film never lands the idea that shortly after getting Paige acclimated to life, Jules abandons her routine and launches a company. So, there's no mention of what Jules was doing before Paige, but somehow she became - essentially - a CEO of a start-up at a time when her husband was rocking the field and their daughter was at a pretty vulnerable age. Jules's motivation is unclear; she clearly cares about her business, but it's not clear why she had a child or, having had the child, why she ever started the business (she's a micromanager and having not been a business manager prior to Paige's birth, it seems like she would have just micromanaged the hell out of her daughter).

Jules is not the CEO, but she is running her own start-up. Cameron is introduced as, essentially, her consigliere and the assumption is that he is her CFO. But Cameron is way too familiar with Jules. Jules is a woman in authority and the way Cameron puts his hands on her in one of their first scenes was tremendously inappropriate for an employee. There might be some subtext that Cameron is supposed to be gay, but that doesn't actually excuse the familiarity he shows her.

That leads to the big conceptual problem with The Intern. Jules is not a very good business manager and Cameron is not a very good consigliere. Jules clearly wants to do right by her employees, but she micromanages every aspect of the business. The unseen investors are absolutely right to fear the way Jules is running ATF; she is on a trajectory to burn out because she does not delegate. But Cameron gives her terrible advice in asking her to take interviews for a potential CEO. Writer and director Nancy Meyers is working under a very old paradigm and does not understand well how the tech start-ups have changed the landscape of the business world. Tech start-ups have made a lot of people very powerful and put them in positions from which they will not advance - there are a number of company Founders and CEOs that have incredible staffs that, by the sheer fact of numbers, cannot all advance to the top of the company. Jules, who is supposed to be strong and independent and smart, takes the advice by Cameron to take the most passive possible approach on hiring a CEO; take interviews from interested people (I believe all of the referenced candidates were men). Jules resents having to do this and her character is gutted as a result.

Meyers set up a very realistic problem and then pursued the least character-driven solution for it. Strong, independent, and smart businesspeople in Jules's position do not wait for the phone to ring; they find people they admire and woo them to their company. Jules would have been so much stronger and not a pouty wuss had she looked around at The Industry and found someone whose accomplishments she admired and then wooed them to become the CEO. Or, on par with that, she would have approached them to mentor her to become the CEO the company needed to assuage the investors.

In this way, Robert De Niro's Ben Whittaker is dramatically misused in The Intern. Whittaker has a wealth of experience in business and Jules quickly comes to rely on him. . . to drive her around, to clean up a junk desk, and to listen to her problems without really judging them. Outside a charming scene near the film's end where Whittaker reveals just how intimately he knows the ATF building, Jules fails to grasp just what an asset Whittaker could be to grooming her to be a CEO. Perhaps, The Intern would have been more obviously a woman-empowering story had De Niro's part been cast by a woman. Then, of course, the structural problem would have existed; how did Jules fail to recognize such an experienced talent (sad to say there are only so many seventy year-old women who had the profound level of executive experience Whittaker had).

As it is, Whittaker is plagued by other structural character problems that make it hard to buy his character. The audience is supposed to instantly love how classic he is and how mature . . . but he doesn't have the wherewithal to tell Patty he is not interested in her?! How up front is that? Moreover, Whittaker has not truly moved on from the death of his wife, but that does not stop him from heading into a relationship with Rene Russo's Fiona (the company messeuse). For all the shit male directors take about how women are used in movies, it's not winning Meyers any points that De Niro's Whittaker rejects the nurturing, non-Hollywood beautiful Patty (played by Linda Lavin) in favor of Russo, who by most objective standards is smoking-hot in The Intern. Patty's purpose in the film seems to be to make it clear that someone as great at Robert De Niro's Whittaker is not going unnoticed by his peers, he's just not interested. (Very sarcastically) Kudos to Meyers to having Whittaker show interest in the first woman to give him an erection in years!

Finally, as a trendsetter, it seems odd that Jules would idolize Whittaker and his generation. Jules laments how the current generation is not classy like Harrison Ford . . . but she relies almost entirely upon the talents of a workforce that realized they did not have to look like Ford to be substantive and great. And given how shittastic the economy is now, wouldn't the bulk of Jules's investors be in Whittaker's age bracket?! Shouldn't she resent those who have it all together financially for pushing her in this direction she is loathe to go instead of bemoaning that her employees - who make her dream into a working reality! - do not have the "class" of Harrison Ford?!

Ultimately, after one gets through the oppressive and somewhat overstated beginning, they get into a few gem scenes and a whole vast ocean of plot and character problems that are realized simply by scratching the surface with a critical lens.

For other works with Anders Holmes, please check out my reviews of:
The Interview
Inherent Vice
Neighbors
Arrested Development - Season 4
Workaholics - Season 1

5/10

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

© 2015 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

After Years Of Being Encouraged To View,I Sit Down And Fail To Enjoy The Holiday.

The Good: Moments (infrequent) of acting, Moments of charm
The Bad: Utterly predictable, Much of the character elements, Light on DVD bonus features, Acting
The Basics: In The Holiday, Kate Winslet and Cameron Diaz lead a decent cast, almost universally performing poorly, in a boring, terribly predictable romantic comedy.


My mother has been on me to watch The Holiday for the last two years. In fact, it might be the very first movie she finished watching and insisted right away that I sit down and watch. I have been busy, between writing novels and reviewing movies that I want to review, but lately a break in my schedule and supply ran out, so I decided to give my mother's beloved movie a chance.

Nancy Meyers, who directed Something's Gotta' Give (reviewed here!) and What Women Want (reviewed here!), two movies I found terribly average, returns to write and direct this Christmas-themed romantic (alleged) comedy. I was largely underwhelmed by the movie, most notably by the acting. It seemed like all of the actors had moments they were decent in, until the moments they were used in familiar ways (save Kate Winslet, who was fine throughout). But for the most part, this is a predictable, obvious romance movie with predictable pairings and a pretty obvious resolution.

Iris Simpkins is working with the love of her life at a publication where she writes about society's great weddings. She is hopelessly in love - in an unrequited way - with Jasper Bloom, with whom she flirts and swaps Christmas gifts up until the moment that he abruptly announces he is engaged to be married to someone else. Devastated, Iris looks to flee. This, conveniently enough, occurs more or less at the same time that movie trailer maker Amanda Woods breaks up with her long-term boyfriend for an affair she suspected he had and soon confirms for her. Looking to get out of Los Angeles, she finds a place in Surrey, England, to swap houses with and the person she is swapping with happens to be Iris. As Iris goes to Los Angeles to a much bigger, luxurious place, Amanda finds herself in a cozy cottage in Surrey where there is nothing to do but wrestle with her personal demons.

In Amanda's house and neighborhood, Iris encounters the film composer Miles, but seems even more drawn to the elderly writer in the neighborhood, Arthur Abbott, who she rescues while he is wandering one day. As Iris avoids Jasper, she helps Arthur get into shape for an award's ceremony in his honor and discovers Miles is charming and less attached than he initially seems. Amanda, thrilled to be away from Ethan, finds herself in the company of Graham, who appears to be something of a womanizer . . . until Amanda meets the women in his life and realizes things have become complicated between them!

The Holiday starts slow, develops to boring and ends lackluster. In fact, the only parts of the movie worth watching are the moments between Iris and Arthur. Here's why: those parts of the movie use the cast in the best possible way and eliminate most of the problems the film possesses. They move, they have character elements that make sense (sort of) and the actors and acting in them are decent. Viewed out of context of the rest of the movie, even the problematic aspects of those scenes work.

Arguably the best moment of the film, the moment that actually has something original and different to say, in The Holiday comes in one of the scenes between Arthur and Iris. That moment has Arthur evaluating Iris as the "best friend" role in her own life. It is a decent monologue and a great concept and Iris latches onto it. The problem is, it doesn't fit Iris's character. Arthur gets it right; she is not the leading lady in her own life, but she isn't even the best friend; she is a non-speaking supernumerary (background performer). Iris is such a nonentity and there is so little interest paid in the way she is painted from the outset that her portions are painful and boring to watch up until the time that Arthur comes into the movie to share the screen with her.

Romantic comedies do not necessarily have to trade on surprise, so predictability in a movie like The Holiday is not necessarily devastating. But in this case, everything is predictable and it is unpleasant how simple the writer and director assumes the audience is. While the mood at the outset is interesting and appropriately painful, at least in the Iris/Jasper relationship, the film soon fails to trade on even that intrigue. As a result, Miles and Iris come together simply by the virtue that they are proximate to one another at the holidays. Neither one seems emotionally intelligent. Come to think of it, neither does Graham, who latches right on to Amanda, who has just ended a five-year relationship.

In the movie filled with people who are otherwise smart, but appear to be emotional idiots, the least interesting characters are Amanda Woods and Ethan. Amanda excising Ethan works, but the resulting need to get away makes little sense to those schooled in the way of psychology hardly seems real. For sure, there is no one way to react to trauma and change, but Amanda gets rid of Ethan, cuts a perfect trailer (which was one of the problems Ethan had with her) and flees rather than bury herself in her work. If the movie had even had a single scene where she wore out her workers cutting films before she was forced to take a vacation, the character would have worked much, much better.

That said, the only truly interesting man in the movie is Arthur, largely because he is the character that seems to be best acted (an irony, considering that Arthur is probably much closer to actor Eli Wallach than any of the other actors are to their characters). The problematic aspects of the movie are all exploded by the acting. Edward Burns and Rufus Sewell are strangely bland in their roles as rejected male love interests. Jude Law and Jack Black both have moments where they are decent, but those moments fade ridiculously quickly when both of them fall back on their standards. Law is fine up until the moment where he is expected to give the Jude Law Penetrating Look #5 that is supposed to make all of the women swoon and . . . completely does not fit his character of Graham.

Similarly, Jack Black is either stuck into his same niche or the part was altered when he was cast or the role of Miles was written with him in mind. I write this because Black is great up until a scene in a video store with Winslet. Miles - up until that point - has been friendly, but serious and grounded and the role had Jack Black actually acting. But in that scene, he begins singing various scores from movies and his character never recovers from that. Yes, it is after that that the scene from the trailer with the "brushing the boob" line comes up and that is a perfectly Jack Black delivery. Unfortunately, it is not in character for Miles so much as it is Black.

At least Jack Black is given the moments to play before his character or performance turn south. Cameron Diaz is not even given that chance. Instead, she starts off with the same bug-eyed, momentarily spastic performance she has become known for and she never pulls herself out of it. This is not even for a moment a stretch for her as an actress and it is reminiscent of several prior roles of hers.

The only actress who seems to hold it together is Kate Winslet, who is decent as Iris, though the character is far more boring than Arthur or Miles ever admits. Winslet is good, but the role is not great.

This is, perhaps, emblematic of the entire movie. The Holiday is a ridiculously simple pitch concept: two women swap houses and fall in love with people in their new setting as a result. The problem is it never becomes more than that and it is not a great concept even with that. On DVD, there are previews for other movies and a commentary track with writer/director Nancy Meyers that I was not bored or interested enough to subject myself to. There are plenty of other movies out there I would rather devote my time and energy to.

For other works with Eli Wallach, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Mystic River
Keeping The Faith

4.5/10

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

© 2012, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Giving Just Enough: Something’s Gotta Give Is Not Bad.

The Good: Good acting, Interesting characters, Initially interesting plot
The Bad: Film mortgages characters for safe plot resolution
The Basics: When the playboy Harry Sanborn meets the cultured playwright Erica Barry, an unpredictable friendship is formed that is generally satisfying.


The problem with writing a review for Something’s Gotta Give is that all of the serious detractions to the movie come in the resolution of the film. I'm not one to spoil a movie where it is probable that one does not know where it is going, so my review (and average rating of the movie) will be somewhat less developed than it could be.

While famous bachelor Harry Sanborn is dating his latest young, uncomplicated conquest, he finds himself in the presence of noted playwright Erica Barry. Barry is repulsed by Harry's immediate air of implied chauvinism and prejudiced against his business (despite being an older white guy, Harry owns a hip-hop label). When Harry has a heart attack, he is forced to stay in Erica's house, where he begins to develop a relationship with her, as opposed to her daughter Marin.

As Erica and Harry get to know one another, Erica finds herself charmed. Their friendship opens her up to a relationship with Harry's young doctor, Julian. Julian is a big fan of Erica's plays and he makes it clear from their first meeting that he would love to get to know her. So, Erica's personal and professional lives become complicated by relationships.

And the two real problems with Something’s Gotta Give (outside the ridiculously inappropriate title) are how the plots are resolved and Keanu Reeves. The movie establishes a premise that challenges the conventions of relationships that people in the United States are accustomed to. I like that. While Erica is exploring her options with Julian, the movie is intriguing. When Harry is spending time with Erica relating why he enjoys dating women in their late twenties, he reveals levels of relationship complexity (or lack of complexity) that defy the expectations we have of a man who does not date within his age group.

So, Something’s Gotta Give sets the viewer up for an experience that will challenge our conventions, possibly make us think and otherwise be something different. I like different, especially when it works. And for a time, this movie works. But then . . .

The other problem I have is with Keanu Reeves. Reeves is not a great actor and in this movie he's required to show interest in Diane Keaton's character. We never feel a real spark here. Reeves does not emote in a way that makes the viewer believe he is truly into Erica. As a result, the plot problems in some ways become evident. This, I'm sure, was not intended. That is, the only reason the ends come as no real surprise is because Reeves does not play his part with any on-screen chemistry.

Outside that, the movie works. It's funny, it's heartwarming, it is heartwrenching all in turn. The plot is fairly well put together and the characters are interesting. The acting, outside Reeves, is great. Frances McDormand enters the movie at the outset and leaves far too early. Amanda Peet gives a vivid performance as Marin and from her opening scenes, we believe that she could be with Jack Nicholson's Harry.

Nicholson, for his part, gives a performance on par with his appearance in As Good As It Gets (reviewed here!). He is more articulate as Harry Sanborn than in any role in recent memory of his. His portrayal in Something’s Gotta Give almost redeems his unbearable About Schmidt (reviewed here!). When appropriate, he is articulate, then funny, then genuinely emotional. Seeing him work through his issues is impressive as a character study and Nicholson makes the character work.

The movie turns on Diane Keaton's performance as Erica Barry. First off, it's always a pleasure to see women past what Hollywood considers their prime taking supposed risks like nude scenes and Keaton pulls hers off with panache. Keaton is given the toughest role in the middle of the movie of expressing loss and sorrow while attempting to be productive through it. During that wrenching sequence, which might last a whisper too long, Keaton is utterly convincing. Her performance is powerful and it is impossible not to feel empathy for her character. That empathy is not guaranteed by the audience, Keaton earns it. And that's pretty cool.

Who will enjoy Something's Gotta Give? Anyone who would like a decent romantic comedy. This is fairly archetypal but it opens well and sucks the viewer in quite effectively. It's worth a viewing, even if it's a tough sell for one's permanent collection.

For other works with Diane Keaton, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Morning Glory
The Family Stone
Annie Hall
The Godfather, Part II
The Godfather

5.5/10

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.
| | |

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.
| | |

A Surprisingly Adult Film With No Real Easy Answers: It's Complicated Succeeds!

The Good: Funny, Angsty, Good idea, Interesting characters, The acting
The Bad: Some of the characters conform to the plot too easily, A few less inspired minor actors' performances.
The Basics: It's Complicated delivers on its title by presenting a couple, ten years divorced, who finds themselves coming back together in a movie with great primary cast performances and complexity that is satisfyingly adult.


Lately, I have been not so keen on building up a backlog with reviews. With movies I see, I pretty much want to review them right away and with my new laptop (Da Vinci!) I have that ability. So, the screen has barely faded in my room and my wife is sitting beside me checking her e-mail on her laptop and I am beginning my review of the film It's Complicated, which we just finished watching together. I'll admit; I had some trepidations about watching this adult comedy with my wife because I have been divorced once and I'm never eager to stir up any issues with my wonderful new wife that might inspire any feelings on her part of Second Wife Syndrome. So, I was pleasantly surprised when we discovered that It's Complicated involved adult situations and a level of complexity both of us were stimulated by without making us question our partnership. That's always refreshing!

Actually, It's Complicated came to us at a good time. For as much as I enjoyed younger casts doing goofy things under the guise of love, like in Friends With Benefits (reviewed here!), I had a hankering for something a little more adult. Similarly, while I enjoyed the tone of Crazy Stupid Love. (reviewed here!), I was very much in the minority in that Ryan Gosling's character's arc didn't interest me and I was much more interested in how Steve Carell's character would adapt to his divorce. So enter It's Complicated, a film that lives up to its name by presenting the complexities of divorce in a way that largely works. Writer and director Nancy Meyers has a knack for creating questions without clear-cut answers and then not simplifying the responses to them.

Divorced for ten years, Jane and Jake nevertheless run into one another, be it at parties for old, mutual friends or their son's graduation from college. While Jane notices Jake's younger wife and is still unsettled by her, it is nothing compared to how Jake begins to notice Jane once again. Between having a wife who had an affair on him once upon a time and a five year-old demon child, Jake begins to see Jane as salvation from his situations. And one night in New York City, after getting very drunk, the two have sex and Jake makes it clear he wants more.

Jane's life then begins to spiral out of control because she is both interested in Jake and his advances back into her life and the attentions of her architect, Adam. Adam is designing the dream addition to Jane's house while struggling with is own divorce, but he begins to send very clear signals to Jane that he would be open to a romantic relationship with her. What follows, then, is Jane trying to wrestle and reconcile her feelings for Jake, her feelings for Adam and the needs of her adult children while Jake comes to realize he has to take a stand in his own marriage.

It's Complicated works because it does not chicken out on the big questions or the serious issues set up at the outset of the film. Instead, the movie does not fall into the familiar paradigm of "woman must choose between old familiar romantic character A and dashing new character B." As part of talking about the film afterward - and yes, this is a film one is likely to want to talk about with their partner! - we agreed that one of the real strengths of the film was that it did not play to familiar patterns. My wife liked that it did not include a stereotypical tear-jerker scene late in the movie and I enjoyed the fact that there was so much consistent angst throughout the movie that they could not have pulled off such a moment if they had tried. In other words, the movie effectively illustrates how difficult divorce can be and how awkward finding romance afterward may be; we were not invested in who Jane chose (Jake or Adam), we were more along for the journey. And more important to us over who Jane chose was whether or not Jake left his wife.

Despite the indecision causing a real sense of consistent angst throughout the movie, It's Complicated is actually very entertaining. Steve Martin's Adam is utterly charming and Meryl Streep plays Jane with wonderful body language and expressions. Indeed, the scene where the two of them play their characters stoned is very funny. Alec Baldwin is charming as Jake and he has moments where he brings depth and complexity to Jake with a simple movement of his eyes which Nancy Meyers is adept enough to capture. John Krasinski steals his scenes as Jake and Jane's soon-to-be son-in-law, Harley, who is given the most consistent humor to deliver. The four of them carry most of the movie on the acting front and make for an enjoyable viewing experience.

But the younger cast is much more shaky. While Hunter Parrish does fine as Luke, the son of the ex-couple, Zoe Kazan and Caitlin Fitzgerald are particularly bland as Jane and Jake's adult daughters. While Krasinski dominates his scenes, Fitzgerald is stiflingly dull as his character's fiance. Her idea of emoting seems to be staring at the camera and tilting her head and it comes across poorly.

My other nit with the movie is actually in how Jane's friends react to her telling them she is having an affair with Jake. Jane has three friends she tells and while one expresses some trepidation, within two minutes, she is shouting "details! details!" I didn't buy how all of her friends immediately glom onto the idea of her having an affair with her married ex-husband. Not one had a moral core that rejected this idea?! Jane is so conflicted about it, she begs her therapist to give her direction, yet her friends are not so much supportive but nonentities that they leap on the relationship more wholeheartedly than Jane herself.

On DVD, It's Complicated comes with a featurette on the creation of the film and a lone commentary track with production staff, both of which are informative but fairly typical for this type film.

Ultimately, It's Complicated is an adult dramedy that has humor and fun, but is more often conflicted. The main cast gives vibrant performances that make the viewer believe so many intelligent people could engage in behavior that might otherwise seem reprehensible. The magic of Nancy Meyer's script and film is that they are presented in such a fashion that the characters never seem cheap and the complexities of adult relationships never seem to be swept aside for the cheap laugh or the easy answer.

For other films featuring Meryl Streep, please check out my reviews of:
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
Out Of Africa
Kramer Vs. Kramer
The Deer Hunter

8/10

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

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

| | |