Went to see new Brithope ‘Love, Actually’ t’other night. (“Oh no!” readers cry, “he’s reduced to writing about movies already!” Well, shush. I’m going somewhere with this.)
‘Love…’ does what it says on the box – romance, Christmas, snow, public declarations of love, Atkinson Firth Grant Rickman Thompson Lincoln Knightley Neeson etc etc. The bad stuff is also pretty unsurprising – non-white characters are all in marginal roles (London, the whitest most-ethnically-diverse city in the world!), dumb bits with Comedy Americans, a gobsmackingly stupid portrayal of politics that could be overlooked if September 11 wasn’t explicitly referenced in the opening monologue.
But.
‘Love…’ does its po-mo po-faced, with characters taking their love lessons from movies (it ain’t over till its over, it all comes together at the last possible moment, you have to run across town and call out someone’s name before they slip out of your life forever). It even quotes about 10 seconds of ‘Titanic’ full-frame (I had a weird feeling that someone taped over the movie). The ‘Titanic’ riff is calculated. ‘Love, Actually’ has sold itself as the follow-on to ‘Four Weddings and a Funeral’ and ‘Notting Hill’, but that’s just to get you in the door. It has set its sights far higher than that. ‘Love, Actually’ is intended as the spiritual successor to ‘Titanic’.
(ASIDE: ‘Titanic’, of course, is the most recent adoptee of the Gone With The Wind Trophy for the Most Romantic Movie Of All Time. It’s also a nice barometer for comprehending movie criticism.
Now, I loved ‘Titanic’. I saw it three times on the big screen. I do not apologise for this. Sure, the characters are two-dimensional. Sure, it’s an unrealistic fairy-tale stapled on to a horrific historical tragedy. Sure. But if you buy into its desperate Mills & Boon-via-Tom Clancy logic, it’s one hell of a tale. And it isn’t that hard to buy in – this was the movie that broke records and made 3-hour films entirely mainstream, remember? (Another of Jim Cameron’s multitiude of sins. But I digress.)
Lots of smart people hated ‘Titanic’ but when they say why they hate it, most of the time at least, I can’t help but conclude they have missed the point. Second point of reference for the same thing: season 1 Dawson’s Creek was one of the best teen-romance tales I’ve ever come across. Lots of people hated the way all the characters talked in thirty-something therapy-speak. These people have missed the point. That’s what Dawson’s Creek is.)
‘Love, Actually’ is for *ahem* grown-ups. It doesn’t have the teen-daydream emotional logic of ‘Dawson’ and ‘Titanic’, but it does have a non-rational story structure where the real world is just a backdrop to the stories of people discovering and committing themselves to emotional truths.
The crux of ‘Love…’ is an idea, repeated over and over again, that Christmas is a time for telling the truth. ‘Telling the truth’, of course, is explicitly developed as code for biting your lip, being brave, and admitting to someone that you fancy them.
And that makes this a fascinating movie. It’s being mass-released all over the world. For every person in the audience who is trying to work up the nerve to tell someone that what they really want for Christmas ‘is you’, it lays down a path, hands over the tools, pats them on the back and makes encouraging noises. It does everything but tip alcohol down their throat and spray on perfume/cologne. This movie is trying to make all those people screw up their courage and go for it.
‘Love…’ is trying to change the world. Movies don’t do this often. Certainly not big, mass-release blockbuster type movies. (‘Fight Club’ and ‘American Beauty’ are the only big examples I can think of in the last few years.) I am somewhat cautious about movies that attempt to prompt real change in their viewers’ lives, but by my lights, the message of ‘Love…’ is a grand one. I hope it works. I hope, all over the world, people who see this movie then get their nerve steadied and tell that special someone how they feel.
The planet would be a better place for it.
(By the way, if you are already hooked up with someone, as I am, there is still great enjoyment to be had from the movie. Well, specifically, from Bill Nighy. And the Andrew Lincoln-Keira Knightley storyline, for that matter. But I’ve written long enough.)
So. Date flick.
Yep. But it wants to be the *ultimate* date flick.
It isn’t, by the way.
So what IS the Ultimate Date Flick?
Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2. Of course. We established this years ago, remember?
Date flick? Really? I reckon it’s too soppy for early-in-relationship dating. Too earnestly True Love-esque. The ultimate date flick, imho, is Speed. (But then I haven’t seen the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, let alone TCM2. 🙂
Out of Sight, closely followed by Texas Chain Saw Massacre 2.
An American Werewolf In London is pretty close to the perfect date movie, I reckon. It’s funny, romantic, sexy and scary, and you cry at the end.
Good as ‘Saw 2 is, I didn’t cry at the end.
I got bored halfway through American Werewolf and turned it off. [ducks] Why is crying at the end a good thing for a date flick?
Out of Sight rocks – well sexy flick with an excellent soundtrack by David Holmes. “Rip Rip”, in particular, is one of my favorite songs ever. David Holmes’ soundtrack work is well stunning. Up there with Clint Poppy (c’mon, everyone likes the theme to Requiem for a Dream).
Whoops, Love Actually.
No, it’s not “Bill Nighy”. It’s “Bill motherfucking Nighy”, after that role. Fucking great. And I liked all the sly allusions back to his previous movies – particularly to the sex scene in The Tall Guy, with the subplot with Martin Freeman.
The main problem I had with LA was that (apart from the obvious Pet Shop Boys homage in the title) it was all really fait accompli. A number of the main plots were basically “here’s someone, here’s someone else they’ve just met, they’re in love, now they’re happy”. Eight subplots don’t make for much time to fully develop characters. Allan Rickman/Emma Thompson were probably the most fully-developed characters in it, and they didn’t do much that you couldn’t have done in a 15 minute short film.
I just reckon it’s good to hit as many of the emotional bases as possible (except maybe revulsion – Cannibal Holocaust is a damn fine movie, but not on a first date).
American Werewolf boring? Blasphemy! It went down pretty well at the Muppet CLub. 🙂
Is a date flick:
a) a film that hits the right note for both people (ie, broad appeal), or
b) one that one or other of the people is (traditionally seen to be) dragged along to but ends up enjoying despite themselves (eg, romantic comedies, hardcore action films), or
c) one that creates a particular emotional state?
Like, is TCM2 good because it’s cute and funny and actiony, or because it’s so gruesome it’ll send someone fleeing into your arms so you can subsequently get lucky?
Uhhh… I’m passing the buck on TCM2. Maybe Billy should answer this one as it was his idea. 😉
As to quantifying a date flick… I’m not sure. For example Edward Scissorhands seems to be a great date flick, in that it’s funny and cute and romantic and has gorgeous and talented stars with real chemistry, except that one of the messages of the movie seems to be “Love doesn’t conquer jack.”
Meanwhile, The Evil Dead is a terrible date movie, but Friday the 13th is a good one. Why? Beats me!
Think it runs something like TCM2 is the ultimate first date movie because if she (sorry, it was a guy conversation) was into it and you got some then you would know she was obviously perfect. A vetting method of sorts, a heuristic to happiness.
If you’ve seen TCM2, this will make a certain kind of sense. We were definitely laughing a lot too. Don’t judge me! I don’t even own a TCM2 t-shirt, unlike the rest of them. 🙂
He’s right Dave. But there is a bad way that “she” could get into it, as the recent movie May (not really a good date flick) indicates.
Does it count as a date movie if you take your husband to see it?
I loved Love Actually. It made me laugh and made me cry. It even made me miss London (probably cos no on had to travel on the tube). I’ve seen it twice and will no doubt see it again. It has some problems-(spoliers follow) like why do two plots have men falling in love with their domestic staff? (none of the women fell for employees- assume Laura Linly + cute designer were equal level colleagues) Any why did colin Firth need a housekeeper anyway? The holiday house looked pretty small. Disagree about the black acors being marginal- Keira Knightlys husband appears more than Rowan Atkinson (though doesn’t get the billing on the poster). And actually during the carol singers scene I was thinking about what he salary was supposed to be. The cute Kensington mews house the newlyweds lived in was worth at least a million quid.
And I love the scene of Hugh Grant dancing through Downing St. And the press conference is pure british wish fulfilment fanatasy. Its what every brit really wants their pm to say to the americans (pref before Iraq but better late than never)And actually the tories are probably delighted that someone thinks they can win an election! And Bill Nighy on Ant And Dec’s show is just classic. And the Us president was wonderfully slimemy. And of course Emma Thompson and Alan Rickman were superb. (play dropping- saw Alan Rickman on stage in Private Lives utterly brillant)
So many brillant moments and they make a great picture..
Not sure I agree about the whole trying to change the world theory. But if does so much the better. Also agree with Iona about time and place fro declarations of love.
And I saw so many camera crews by the millenium bridge last year that some of them were bound to be for LA.