BEFORE: As you could probably guess, the original plan was to have Beanie Feldstein carry over to "How to Build a Girl", however that film has not been made available to me on any of the streaming services we subscribe to, not for less than $12.99, anyway, and that's like a full-price movie ticket! I'm not that desperate yet, not when I can just drop that film, reschedule another and have the chain continue. (I'd be willing to rent it for $3.99, but that's not an option.). Then another actress would have carried over to "Tulip Fever" and then Kevin McKidd would have carried over to this one. So I'm really in the same place I would have been before, I just got here two days earlier than planned, and now Whitney Cummings carries over from "The Female Brain".
Really, it's all for the best, because I'm really liking how my chain's going to line up now with Valentine's Day weekend. I can't promise that the MOST romantic film will be reviewed on Feb. 14, but it's still very possible.
THE PLOT: A man afraid of commitment but in love with his engaged best female friend tries to win her over after she asks him to be her maid of honor.
AFTER: Wow, 2008 was not that long ago, this movie is only 13 years old, yet it somehow seems very, very dated. The central character is allegedly some form of "commitment-phobe" guy, but essentially, this seems like just another way of saying he enjoys frequent casual sex with a large number and/or variety of women. And we're supposed to, what, like him for that? What's the term for a male slut? Oh, right, a slut. There's a lame attempt to tie this to the fact that his father is getting married for the sixth time, after five divorces, and I guess, logically, by the transitive property of getting messed up by your parents, because Tom is the child of divorce, therefore his lifestyle is OK? NO, it's not OK, and nothing's going to make it OK. Because he's also a rich person (and therefore some form of asshole) he's only a couple steps removed from being Matt Lauer or Charlie Rose or Bill Cosby - OK, maybe not that bad, but if he thinks that women are only there for his pleasure, and he wants all the benefits of relationships, especially casual sex, without commitment or doing any kind of long-term work, then he's no kind of hero, is he? We're supposed to revere him because he invented the "coffee collar" and therefore he gets a free pass, again and again? I don't think so.
What's weird is that he IS getting all the other benefits of a long-term relationship - friendship, entertainment, shared experiences, long-term running jokes, and a constant companion to his father's many weddings, from his best friend, Hannah, who he's never slept with. They met in college when he was dressed as Bill Clinton for Halloween (classy!) and was going to have a tryst with a woman dressed like Monica Lewinsky (also super classy!) only he accidentally got in bed with her roommate, Hannah. Ha ha, isn't accidental sexual assault hilarious? Umm, no, not any more. All the sitcoms and modern-day romantic comedies have made the adjustment, but you can't go back and fix a film from 2008.
For some reason, Tom never thinks to merge his dating world with his friendship world - I know, there's a certain logic in never crossing the streams, or as some would say, pooping where you eat (those people are vulgarians) but for many people, it just makes sense to fall in love with a close friend - or, alternatively, becoming a good friend to the person you fall in love with. It's not that complicated, really, it's just an offshoot of "treat people the way you want to be treated", so why do so many people seem to have a problem with this. I have male friends, I have female friends, and then there's my wife, who should also be treated as a friend, if not my best friend, then a friend nonetheless. Why on earth would I regard her any other way?
If you're single, why NOT date a friend? Because you don't want to lose a person as a friend? OK, but you might be missing out on the best relationship in your life - and besides, all of that awkward getting-to-know-you period has already been taken care of, so what is the exact problem? Tom has many "rules", though, like don't see the same woman twice between Monday and Friday, or more than once on the same weekend. Gee, I can't imagine why he's still single and hasn't had a long-term relationship, like, ever. I guess it's true that a man is only faithful when he doesn't have other options, because Tom has plenty of options and isn't faithful to anyone. OK, then enjoy dying alone, good luck with that.
Everything changes, however, when Hannah has to go to work in Scotland for six weeks (umm, what exactly is it that she DOES, anyway? Something about restoring paintings in the Met Museum? We only see her work for like a few minutes, and Tom's job is what? Oh, right, he's wealthy because he invented a piece of cardboard to go around a coffee cup and still gets a dime's royalty from each one, which makes no sense because coffee shops don't CHARGE people for them.) and while she's away, Tom has nobody to go to THAT particular café with, or the antique shop. Really, my heart bleeds for this guy, wait a few years and every restaurant and museum in the city will be shut down during the damn pandemic.
But after talking to his male friends, some of whom are married, and somehow managed to navigate those tricky waters and also regard their wives as friends, convince him that dating his best friend is a fine idea. So he makes up his mind that once she gets back, he's going to profess his love for her and try to take their relationship to the next level. Only wouldn't you know it, she met a guy in Scotland, fell in love and is now engaged - it seems that the cell phone service was so bad in Scotland (where it's still the 1800's, apparently) that she was never in a place with proper reception, and she kept missing Tom's calls or was always unable to respond. Curse the demon technology that makes this plot point possible!
So instead Tom has to deal with watching his now-idealized perfect partner making wedding plans with someone else, and worst of all, Hannah asks him to be her "maid of honor", despite the fact that he's not a "maid", and everyone from the priest to her intended's family is going to jump to the conclusion that he's gay. Which, in 2008, was apparently the WORST thing that could happen to a heterosexual male, especially a rich one who dates, like, a LOT of women. Again, somebody here seems really really BAD at creating a sympathetic character - I feel nothing at all for Tom's plight. Really, screw this guy, seriously.
Look, I'm all for dispensing with gender roles. Burn the system to the ground, especially if any part of that system says "Boys can only do THIS, and girls can only do THAT." Boy scouts, girl scouts, why can't we just have SCOUTS? And they can all camp and build fires if they want, and they also ALL have to sell cookies. (Whatever gets me more cookies, I support.) We should have more female priests and more male nurses, women should play in the NFL and MLB and NHL, as long as they are capable and there are also male Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders. Hell, there are male swimsuit models on "The Price Is Right" now, and the world didn't end because of it! Gay, queer, bi, transgender, drag queens and kings, whatever makes people comfortable, we should support, even if that's not our particular thing. But bear in mind, the concept of a male "maid of honor" was still shocking to some - the question is, should it have been?
We've got a female vice president now, and therefore a male "Second Lady" - except the term is properly "Second Gentleman". See, it's not difficult! A male "maid of honor" would be a "man of honor", and a female "best man", and I'm sure it's happened, would just be "best woman" or "best person". If a situation seems like it's not gender-neutral enough for reality, it's an easy fix, just change the damn name! And if still seems wrong, then the problem is not the language, it's your own damn hang-up in your own mind. We're rapidly approaching the point where gender-fluidity takes over and there are going to be new situations and maybe some in-between people, so get with the program, you old farts.
They really tried this "Long-time friends eventually get together" thing in "When Harry Met Sally", and did it a lot better there. Notably, Harry and Sally both had to watch their friends get married to other people, and be supportive of that, because that's the right thing to do for your friends, even if you are secretly in love with them. It's also the selfless thing to do, to allow them to proceed and make what you may feel is a mistake, because there's no way to suggest a course correction for another person without sounding like the bad guy, and a selfish person. Tom here wouldn't even know what a selfless act is - he's always acting in his own best interest, not Hannah's, even after pointing out ways that Colin is not a perfect fit for her. This brings me back to the point I made at the start of the week, which is that people these days don't tend to get into relationships for the benefit of the other person, it's usually for their own benefit, or at least to a mutual benefit.
This means that Tom doesn't REALLY show much character growth over his arc during this movie, at the start he wants to date dozens of women because he sees the benefit to that, and then he wants to have a relationship with Hannah because he's suddenly realized that would also be to his benefit. This whole business of him not being able to say "I Love You" to a human (though he can say it to dogs) is all a dodge - he starts out as a selfish ass and he ends as a selfish ass. So, where's the change and growth, then?
Bottom line, it's fine to fall in love with a friend, and it's also fine to fall in love and then be friends with that person. It's as simple as that, all the rest is just window-dressing and buffoonery - you can film on location in Scotland, and it looks great, but that's hardly a proper substitute for character development. And I still wonder for what reason I'm supposed to like Tom.
Also starring Patrick Dempsey (last seen in "The Emperor's Club"), Michelle Monaghan (last seen in "Playing It Cool"), Kevin McKidd (last heard in "Brave"), Kathleen Quinlan (last seen in "Horns"), Sydney Pollack (last seen in "The Interpreter"), Chris Messina (last seen in "Birds of Prey"), Kadeem Hardison (last seen in "Vampire in Brooklyn"), Richmond Arquette, Busy Philipps (last seen in "I Feel Pretty"), Emily Nelson, James Sikking (last seen in "Narrow Margin"), Christine Barger, Kevin Sussman (last seen in "Killers"), Mary Birdsong (ditto), Beau Garrett, Kelly Carlson, Valerie Edmond, Hannah Gordon (last seen in "The Elephant Man"), Eoin McCarthy (last seen in "Tomorrow Never Dies"), Clive Russell (last seen in "King Arthur" (2004)), Myra McFadyen (last seen in "The Kid Who Would Be King"), Iain Agnew, Murray McArthur, Grant Thomson, Selma Stern, Ron Donachie (last seen in "Outlaw King"), with a cameo from Elisabeth Hasselbeck (last seen in "Gilbert")
RATING: 3 out of 10 Land Rovers
No comments:
Post a Comment