Catch and Release

Year 14, Day 43 - 2/12/22 - Movie #4,045

BEFORE: I think I really dropped the ball here, because in addition to a romance theme, the films for the last few days, back to "Legally Blonde", anyway - have all had female central characters.  So I should have just declared it "Gal-entine's Week" or something like that, right?  Too corny?  Sometime's I inadvertently program a theme and I'm so close to it, I don't even see it, like the forest for the trees, as they say.  OK, so it's Galentine's Week, right up until Valentine's Day on Monday, and then maybe even after that, who knows?  

I'm now 13 films in to the romance chain, but I'm only about 1/3 through this year's mix, so there's still a long way to go.  Thankfully I had two episodes of "The Book of Boba Fett" to watch, which helped break things up a little bit. 

Kevin Smith, filmmaker and part-time actor, carries over from a cameo as a cab driver calling the phone sex line in "For a Good Time, Call..."

FOLLOW-UP TO: "P.S. I Love You" (Movie #3,152)

THE PLOT: A woman struggles to accept the death of her fiancé and the secrets he kept from her as she rebuilds her life.

AFTER: Kind of like "Feast of Love", this film's a big bummer of sorts - come on, we all KNOW that people die and spouses get left behind and have to find a way to bounce back, but we go to the movies to get away from the cold harsh light of reality.  Right?  We don't need to wallow in someone else's misery for the next 100 minutes, because we've probably got enough of it in our own life to deal with, or we WILL someday, so there's that. I'm not saying that we have to see a "happily ever after" in every movie, but neither do I need to be reminded that we've all got one foot in the grave, that death is part of life and also the thing that nobody ever tells you when you get married, namely the fact that one day, perhaps many years down the road but also maybe tomorrow, you could become a widow or a widower.  And that's if you're the luckier of the two. Umm, I think. 

So yeah, that's reality and also the plot of this movie - the day that Gray Wheeler was supposed to be getting married turned out to be the day of her fiancé's funeral instead. Because somebody up there loves irony, or the funeral director wasn't available any other day?  I don't know, it sounds like bad planning or a quirk of the calendar, no matter how you slice it.  But hey, silver lining, maybe family members were planning to fly into Colorado from out of town for the wedding, so I'm guessing the funeral was well attended?  That doesn't seem like much of a consolation prize, I know. 

What followed that was a little confusing, as there's a silent montage of Gray packing up the house, loading up a van and moving in with two male friends who live nearby, and their houseguest, who was best friends with the dead guy.  Or maybe they were all his friends, this is a bit unclear.  But for some reason she couldn't afford the rent on the house after Grady died, I guess that's a possible thing?  But she has a job, doesn't she?  Wait, does she?  I think we see her working at an office like once or twice, but not that often, is she on bereavement leave or something?  I couldn't tell you what her job is, though, it's not mentioned, but apparently it doesn't pay her enough to afford the rent herself, which is weird.  Couldn't she get a roommate or open up an AirBnB or something?  I guess it doesn't matter, because the plot demands that she move into a house with three men so that something else can then happen.  

But she also discovers that Grady had a secret bank account, and this quirk of the plot where he died before they got married means that she's got no claim to the money, it's not community property according to Colorado law.  But it does raise questions, like where did the money come from (never answered) and why was there a $3,000 payment made every month to a massage therapist in California?  The friends determine that maybe Grady was going to tell her about the secret account right after the marriage, but I'm not sure this theory holds water.  What other secrets did her dead fiancé have, and how much do his friends know about them?  

(A lot of weird connections to yesterday's film, not just about rent and secret bank accounts, but also how relationships change between friends when they move in together, and how important it is to repaint rooms when you move in to a new place - I'm not disagreeing, it's always the first thing I do, too.).  

Over time (not that much, I don't think), Gray starts to have feelings for Fritz, her almost-husband's best friend and confidante, despite some HUGE red flags, namely that she spied on him having sex with one of the caterers at her husband's funeral.  Yeah, that wasn't cool, and I can't really see how this wasn't a deal-breaker for her.  Also, he seemed to know the MOST about her almost-husband's secret life, and OK, he didn't betray that trust, but also, that means he was keeping things from her that she probably should have been informed about, and all that should have happened BEFORE the wedding, not after.  The other friend (the one not played by Kevin Smith) eventually reveals that he also has strong feelings for Gray, he's upset about Grady's bad choices have affected her, and I think all in all, he's a stand-up guy.  Which of course, means that Gray's not interested in him at all, because love apparently doesn't work that way.  Maybe that's her problem, she falls for the bad boys, and she needs to break that cycle. 

What bothered me here was the very non-realistic conversations that took place, and across the board every character made nearly everything about ten times more complicated than it needed to be. That'll wear you down as a viewer, sooner or later.  Plus there are WAY too many coincidences to be believed, like Grady's mother running into somebody wearing his fishing hat at an outdoor street market, recognizing that hat as having belonged to her dead son (because come on, no two hats in the world could possibly look alike?) and then putting the pieces together about EVERYTHING from just that.  Mmm, I don't think so.  And then ultimately everybody just sort of pairs up at the end of the movie like it's the easiest thing in the world, just like matching up socks or shuffling cards, but forming partnerships is a much slower, more intricate process, or at least it should be. 

Also starring Jennifer Garner (last seen in "Peppermint"), Timothy Olyphant (last seen in "Head Over Heels"), Sam Jaeger (last seen in "Lucky Number Slevin"), Tina Lifford (last seen in "Hostage"), Fiona Shaw (last seen in "The Tree of Life"), Juliette Lewis (last seen in "A Million Little Pieces"), Joshua Friesen, Georgia Craig (last seen in "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days"), Sonja Bennett (last seen in "The Perfect Score"), Yorgo Constantine (last seen in "Stand Up Guys"), Michael Adamthwaite (last seen in "Horns"), Terence Kelly (last seen in "McCabe & Mrs. Miller"), Gabrielle Rose (last seen in "The Sweet Hereafter").

RATING: 4 out of 10 indie rock emo CDs (dumped on the floor)

For a Good Time, Call...

Year 14, Day 42 - 2/11/22 - Movie #4,044

BEFORE: Well, as they say, it never rains, but it pours. (What is that supposed to mean, exactly, anyway?). A few weeks ago I was frustrated while spending too much time at home again, everybody was either home sick or home trying to not get sick, and the movie theater where I work part-time was closed for winter break, since it's run by an arts college.  Now that the Oscar nominations are out (I will try to get to some of those films, I swear, I'm just working the romance beat right now...) there are all kinds of screenings coming up - the nominated films all want to hold special screenings for Academy members, because the more people SEE those films, the better.  A lot of the Academy members skew older, and some don't know how this whole streaming thing works, I know this first-hand - so they still want to come out to the movies to see the films on the big-screen.  

In January I was lucky to work one shift a week - things got so bad I was overseeing a COVID clinic for the students in the theater lobby on Thursday mornings, starting at 8 am (and I do NOT do mornings well, usually).  Now my calendar is suddenly filling up, three or four shifts a week (starting, umm, next week) so I'm going to be exhausted by the end of February. (It also helps that the theater fired one manager notorious for not showing up, and three others moved on to other jobs.). In March I was hoping to drive up and see my parents for the first time since Thanksgiving, I just have to figure out the right weekend to do that - and who knows, maybe my wife and I can steal away to Atlantic City for a weekend, too, I really miss doing that.  So please please PLEASE can this finally be the tail end of the last wave?

James Wolk carries over from "You Again". 

THE PLOT: Former college frenemies Lauren and Katie move in together in a fabulous NYC apartment and in order to make ends meet, the unlikely pair start a phone sex line together. 

AFTER: Thematically, this feels a bit like the successor film to "Zack and Miri Make a Porno", since both films feature regular people making money off the entertainment division of the sex trade.  Also, this is the second film this February to have phone sex in the plot (three if you count the obscene phone caller in "A Walk on the Moon"), and I'm not sure if phone sex is even a thing any more, since we all have the internet now.  I think we're ALWAYS going to have porn, but then it becomes a question of how it morphs and changes over time. Nobody watches porn on VHS any more, but I still see ads sometimes, late at night, for phone chat lines.  Really?  Still a thing?  I imagine that at least half of the ones still around are just a scam to get your credit card number and then buy a bunch of computers and cell phones at Best Buy.  

The title of this film doesn't come from phone sex, though, it sounds more like what people would right on the wall of a bathroom stall, back in the day, when they wanted to mess with a girl's reputation.  That's the plot of the 80's song "867-5309 (Jenny)", right?  If you're mad at a woman for breaking up with you, you find a busy public bathroom and write a message on the wall "For a good time, call Jenny" (or Sarah, or Elaine, or whatever) and then every desperate or horny guy in town's going to be calling her number to try to have sex with her.  But it's probably a waste of time, if you think about it - do you really believe that a woman would write her OWN number on a bathroom wall, because she also is desperate or horny?  How did she even get in the men's room to write that?  Ah, see, it's probably just a disgruntled ex-boyfriend looking for some payback, but you didn't realize that, did you?  If a man had the name and phone number of a woman who was really easy, had some spare time and was looking for more sex partners, why would he share that with everyone, instead of keeping it to himself?  

I remember the early days of the internet, when there were chat rooms, a computer version of the phone sex lines.  Oh, yeah, sure, the internet chat rooms said they were for football fans, or people who enjoyed the TV show "Friends", but we know what was really going on in there, right?  A lot of hot, steamy, virtual sex - in text form.  And the communication all happened very slowly, because it's hard to type with just one free hand.

What carries over from yesterday's film, "You Again", is the theme of women being frenemies, or former rivals forced to work together, then learning in the process.  In this case Katie and Lauren had some of the same friends in college, but a disastrous drive home after a frat party resulted in a drunk Katie urinating into a cup, then spilling the cup all over Lauren.  But after Lauren breaks up with her boyfriend and needs to find a new apartment (honestly, this is a little confusing, because if her boyfriend is going to Italy for a few months, why does she need to move out?  I guess it's his name on the lease, but people crash in each other's places all the time in New York - unofficially, she could be a house-sitter for him, but then, I guess, who's going to pay the rent?  Maybe his lease was up, but then, why couldn't he have given her a bit more notice?) and Katie's apartment is no longer rent-controlled, both women are teamed up by their mutual friend Jesse - Justin Long playing a gay man, I'm not sure if he succeeded here, it's a tough gig for a straight guy without descending into camp.  (Justin, remember, gay people are just people who happen to be gay, you don't need to develop them as a "character" based on stereotypes.) 

But one night, Lauren hears noises coming from Katie's room, and she catches Katie on the phone with a customer - and when she hears the terrible deal that Katie has with the phone sex line, she urges her to quit and open up her own phone line, with Lauren acting as her business manager.  Well, I suppose there are worse ideas, and with the publishing house of her dreams not hiring at the moment, this does solve two problems, generating income and giving Lauren something to do.  As someone forced to re-enter the gig economy, and currently with a part-time job that I couldn't have even imagined having a year ago, I totally get this.  No, I'm not working in the sex trade (I wish!) but I did get back on a career track that I jumped off of over 30 years ago, and that's a weird feeling, no matter how you slice it. Being a 53-year-old rookie in any trade was bound to be a bit weird.  

The girls hire a new phone sex operator who checks out, passes all their tests, but turns out to be a Jesus freak who drives away half their business - I suppose this could happen, but it's also possible that a bunch of weirdo guys might get off on being called dirty sinners, so I'm not really that sure why they fired her.  Meanwhile, Katie's got a developing relationship with one of her callers, and they decide to meet in the real world to see if there's anything there - after all, their most recent calls have been about just talking and getting to know each other, without the dirty talk.  So, maybe that's one way to find love?  Also meanwhile, Lauren's parents come to visit her and they wonder why there are so many dildos scattered around the apartment.  

After a very interesting summer working the phone lines, Lauren finally does get that offer from the publishing company - all it took was for her to loosen up a bit, apparently, not be so uptight and maybe have some raunchy experiences.  This sort of hearkens back to "She's All That", when Laney's art improved after a boy started showing an interest in her - I wonder how many people know about this "secret" that Hollywood rom-coms are showing us, if you're in love you can be much more productive at your job!  I think, though, it's more likely that if you have your relationship issues sorted out, that's at least one thing you're not constantly worrying about, i could see how that might make it easier to get something done at the office. Or art studio.  Or phone-sex call center.

Lauren surprises herself by taking the publishing job, but Katie sees this as a betrayal of their friendship, and the girls don't talk for a while.  Lauren's boyfriend returns from Italy and wants to get back together with her, after a fling with a hot-tempered Italian woman - he knows the secret, apparently, if he's got a steady relationship he'll do much better at his job!  But Lauren doesn't want to go back to being boring and predictable again, not after getting a taste of the exciting world of sex fantasies.  Katie takes things to the next level with her regular caller, but really, what both women want to do is re-connect with each other, so they do - in a phone conversation FULL of innuendos, their reunion sounds almost exactly like two people having phone sex, or even real sex!  Jesus, will you two girls just get a room already?  

Also starring Ari Graynor (last seen in "Like a Boss"), Lauren Miller Rogen (last seen in "Like Father"), Justin Long (last seen in "After Class"), Sugar Lyn Beard (last seen in "Game Over, Man!"), Mimi Rogers (last seen in "Hope Springs"), Don McManus (last seen in "The Onion Movie"), Nia Vardalos (last seen in "Connie and Carla"), Mark Webber (last seen in "Save the Date"), Seth Rogen (last seen in "The Oath"), Kevin Smith (last seen in "Scream 3"), Martha MacIsaac (last seen in "Battle of the Sexes"), Ken Marino (last seen in "Goosebumps"), Lawrence Mandley, Steven Shaw (last seen in "Suburbicon").

RATING: 6 out of 10 pole dances (you know, they're great for the abs!)

You Again

Year 14, Day 41 - 2/10/22 - Movie #4,043

BEFORE: We're getting close to Valentine's Day now, love is in the air - or is that the smell of the heart-shaped brownie batter donuts available at Dunkin?  

Victor Garber carries over from "How Stella Got Her Groove Back", this makes three films for him in February, even if they weren't all in a row.

THE PLOT: When a young woman realizes her brother is about to marry the girl who bullied her in high school, she sets out to expose his fiancée's true colors. 

AFTER: Well, the second week of the romance chain has certainly issue-oriented - we've covered infidelity in Portland, a murder trial in Boston, animal rights legislation in Washington, and dating younger men in Jamaica.  Tonight's central focus is high-school bullying, and the effects on both the bullied AND the bulliers years later, in the fictitious Ridgefield, California.  

Marni was your typical geeky girl, she had glasses, braces and acne - the dreaded triangle of high-school unattractiveness - but in the ten (?) years since high school, she managed to turn things around, get better haircuts, contact lenses, and is rising through the ranks of a successful PR firm. She's come to terms with the fact that her life in high school was less than ideal, but it shaped her into the person that she is, and she's made her peace with it.  Until, that is, she finds out that her brother is engaged to Joanna, the girl she knew in high school as "JJ", who made her life miserable.  How her brother met Joanna, formed a bond with her, got engaged, all without knowing that this girl was cruel to his sister in the past, well, that's a bit questionable.  But it's exactly the situation that needs to be resolved, so you just sort of have to accept it. 

Marni refuses to accept this, even though when she returns home (apparently for the first time in a long while) for the wedding, Joanna claims not to remember her.  Is it possible that Marni has changed so much in 10 years that her former tormentor doesn't recognize her?  Joanna also is a doctor who works for charitable organizations, it really seems like maybe she's turned over a new leaf - but, HAS SHE?  Or is it all an act, a con game, and if so, how much of her is genuine, and how much is a put-on?  Marni has to know before the wedding takes place, so she drops hints, brings up old gossip from high school, essentially she pokes the bear, hoping to get a reaction.  

Meanwhile, Joanna's Aunt Mona, who's a successful hotelier and is footing the bill for the wedding, arrives on the scene, and recognizes Marni's mother from her high-school days.  The two older women also had some kind of antagonistic relationship in high school (Jeez, what are the ODDS of that?) even though they started out as besties, there was some incident at prom involving somebody pushing somebody else into the pool.  Not cool.  

Once Marni determines that her bully from high school has NOT really changed her ways, she feels vindicated, but also reverts to her "loser" persona from high school - events seem to conspire against her, and she ends up with a bad haircut, skin irritations and loses her contact lenses in a freak accident, so she looks just like her yearbook photo again.  And her mother's going through something similar, back competing with her own high-school nemesis.  The wedding plans keep moving forward, with the soon-to-be extended family taking dance lessons together, and the two women accidentally wear the same dress to the rehearsal dinner. 

Marni also invites Joanna's ex-boyfriend (a little too conveniently, he works for the wedding planner) to the rehearsal dinner, just to cause a fuss, and also unearths a time capsule that wasn't supposed to be opened for 50 years, just to get a video of Joanna acting cruel to her.  (Umm, NITPICK POINT, how did that video get approved for the time capsule in the first place?  Wasn't there any kind of oversight committee checking what was being put in the capsule, to make sure that the material was appropriate for future generations to watch?).  The point, however, is that Marni's taken to fighting fire with fire, she's become the bully of her bully, and two wrongs don't necessarily make a right. The fight between Marni and Joanna turns physical, just as her brother returns to the scene, causing him to get mad at both women - and he's not wrong. 

Eventually there are apologies and reconciliations all around, and of course this is a rom-com, so the wedding does eventually take place, just not in the way originally intended.  But at no point in the early part of the film does anyone speak openly with anyone else about their feelings, and I guess we all then see where exactly that can end up, devolving into a lot of slapstick - broken vases and a tureen of soup dumped on someone's head.  

But there are still a number of things that don't really add up here.  Here's what bothered me - the groom wants to move the family's beloved treehouse from the house he grew up in to his future home.  Who DOES that?  First of all, a treehouse is probably built specifically to the specs and contours of THAT particular tree - where the branches are, how much weight that tree can support, etc.  Moving it to another tree is a terrible idea, Marni's against it, but why can't she reason with her own brother, explain why this is a bad idea, also it's not fair to their little brother, who still enjoys spending time in the treehouse.  You want a treehouse in your new backyard?  Fine, then build one yourself in your own tree!  It's representative of what happens throughout this whole film, everyone's always walking on eggshells around everybody else, afraid to have the exact conversation that's needed to resolve any issue. Why does it have to be like this? 

(Also, if you wanted that treehouse to stay where it is, you shouldn't LOOSEN all the screws, you should tighten them, plus add some more nails. Just saying.)

Betty White stars as Marni's grandmother, and there's a funny bit at the end that suggests that this rivalry between women has been going on for generations - but even then, there's a difference between two girls being rivals/frenemies and one girl flat-out bullying another girl very cruelly, it's too bad the film just seems to lump these different situations together and not make a distinction between them.  If you remember, I half-dedicated this year to the late Betty White, so it only took me 43 films to get to one with her in it, and there's at least one more film with her coming up in June.  

Another NITPICK POINT, though - Marni doesn't have enough pull via her PR firm to get in touch with the most sought-after wedding planner, but she's somehow got enough juice to get Hall and Oates to play at the wedding?  It just seems like a weird place to draw that line. 

Also starring Kristen Bell (last seen in "Scream 4"), Jamie Lee Curtis (last seen in "Knives Out"), Sigourney Weaver (last seen in "The Cold Light of Day"), Odette Annable/Yustman, James Wolk (last seen in "The Stanford Prison Experiment"), Betty White (last seen in "Hard Rain"), Kristin Chenoweth (last heard in "Strange Magic"), Sean Wing, Kyle Bornheimer (last heard in "Onward"), Billy Unger/William Brent (last heard in "Bride Wars"), Christine Lakin (last seen in "Race to Witch Mountain"), Paul Nygro (ditto), Meagan Holder, Reginald VelJohnson, Staci Keanan, Shanola Hampton, Jenna Leigh Green (last seen in "I Am Michael"), Christopher Khai, Ashley Fink, with cameos from Dwayne Johnson (last seen in "Jumanji: The Next Level"), Cloris Leachman (last seen in "Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse"), Daryl Hall, John Oates, Catherine Bach (last seen in "Hustle"). 

RATING: 5 out of 10 better ways to deal with bullying

How Stella Got Her Groove Back

Year 14, Day 40 - 2/9/22 - Movie #4,042

BEFORE: Proceeding with the revised February plan - this would have been easier if Victor Garber had returned for "Legally Blonde 2", but he didn't - which is fine, but I could have connected straight to tomorrow's film if he had. This film gets me there, but I had this film on the "maybe" list, paired with "Waiting to Exhale", meaning that I don't have a physical or digital copy handy, but I'm aware of the film's reputation and I could probably find it on streaming somewhere if there's a sudden need to work it in.  Well, the need is here, only now I've stranded "Waiting to Exhale", it doesn't connect to any other romance films left on the list.  If I need it in 2023, I can probably find a way to work it in by adding more films - as I've said, next year's chain is a problem for another day, right now I only need to worry about putting together a chain that works for THIS year. 

Regina King carries over from "Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde".

THE PLOT: Stella is a highly successful, forty-something San Francisco stock broker who is persuaded by her colorful New York friend Delilah to take a well-deserved, first-class vacation to Jamaica. 

AFTER: Well, I finally cracked the mystery and learned how Stella got her groove back - I suppose I've always wondered about that on some level.  She went to Jamaica, that's how she did it.  Whoops, sorry - SPOILER ALERT, she went to Jamaica and found romance with a man half her age.  Yep, that'll do it, movie over, mystery solved, see you tomorrow.  JK. 

Obviously I'm way outside the intended demographic for this film - it's a female-oriented film, it's a black-oriented film - so you'd think maybe I'd be way out of my comfort zone, right?  But it really shouldn't matter, romance is where you find it.  I have been to Jamaica, so there's that. Heck, between three cruises, I've been all over the Caribbean, and I don't even swim or like beaches all that much.  Our second cruise was the Eastern Caribbean, and the third cruise went WAY south, to Colombia and then the Panama Canal - so it must have been the first cruise, the honeymoon cruise. (Yeah, thanks to COVID I think our cruising days are over...). We were in Ocho Rios, Jamaica, the place with that big, shallow waterfall, and I think we took a bus tour of the island - beautiful place.  

Anyway, very busy, very divorced 40-something mother Stella gets lost in a Jamaican tourism commercial, and before you know it, she and her New York friend are meeting up in a bar in a Montego Bay resort, and there's no shortage of older gentlemen dancing in their pajamas to hook up with.  But Stella hesitates, and instead is joined at breakfast the next day by a twenty-something medical school drop-out named Winston Shakespeare who asks her too many personal questions - or is she just out of practice in the art of making conversation and flirting? He expresses interest in her and pursues her, and really, given the choice between the young buck and the older, flabby guys at the resort, it's hard to say she makes the wrong choice.  

It's clear she's a thinker, not a fast mover - so there's a lot of consideration and navel-gazing before she enters into a relationship with this younger man.  Eventually after she makes several trips to Jamaica, he comes to the U.S. to live with her, and then there's much more over-thinking going on when marriage is considered.  Winston is a fine man, considerate lover and is also great when it comes to bonding with Stella's son, but it's a huge step to make - and a divorced person might be likely to take a long time when considering getting re-married, I get that.  But if you wait too long, then you're not thinking about doing it, you're just not doing it. But at the same time, she's got career problems and her best friend is going through health issues.

The whole time I was thinking - what if Winston's only interested in coming to America for other reasons?  You know, to get a green card and a better job, better life in America.  Well, it turns out that's what happened to the author of "How Stella Got Her Groove Back", Terry McMillan.  She wrote the book based on her own life and her own trip to Jamaica, where she met a man in her early twenties, and she married him.   But six years later he told her he was gay, and only married her for that green card - and they got divorced.  But that's in real life, not the movie. 

The movie instead features one of those "darkest before the dawn" moments, where Winston decides that if Stella's not going to marry him, he's better off heading back to Jamaica to return to medical school.  It's what his parents wanted him to do, anyway.  But can the L.A. traffic keep him from getting to the airport long enough for Stella to catch up with him?  What do YOU think?

Also starring Angela Bassett (last seen in "Gunpowder Milkshake"), Taye Diggs (last seen in "Opening Night"), Whoopi Goldberg (last seen in "Spielberg"), Suzzanne Douglas, Michael J. Pagan, Sicily, Richard Lawson (last seen in "Streets of Fire"), Barry Shabaka Henley (last seen in "Lucky"), Lee Weaver (last seen in "Fathers' Day"), Glynn Turman (last seen in "The Way Back"), Phyllis Yvonne Stickney (last seen in "Malcolm X"), Denise Hunt, James Pickens Jr. (last seen in "Sphere"), Philip Casnoff (last seen in "The Post"), Lou Myers (last seen in "The Wedding Planner"), Art Metrano, Carl Lumbly (last seen in "A Cure for Wellness"), Phina Oruche, Victor Garber (last seen in "Legally Blonde")

RATING: 5 out of 10 bowls of Cocoa Puffs, eaten in bed

Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde

Year 14, Day 39 - 2/8/22 - Movie #4,041

BEFORE: I'm doubling up (or is it doubling down?) on "Legally Blonde" movies today, because this will put the "right" film - aka the one with the best title - square on Valentine's Day. I won't know if it's thematically the right film for February 14 until I watch it, sometimes all I have to go by is the title.  For a while this was going to be the 1992 version of "Wuthering Heights", but after the re-organization of February, another opportunity arose, so I'm taking it.  Also, I'm watching both of these films because I'm a glutton for punishment, really I don't have a better explanation than that.  Maybe this saves me the trouble to trying to land this film (set in Washington DC) on July 4? I already have movie plans for that date, so let's cross this one off now, shall we?

Reese Witherspoon, along with several others, carries over from "Legally Blonde". 

THE PLOT: Elle Woods heads to Washington, D.C. to join the staff of a Representative in order to pass a bill to ban animal testing.

AFTER: A couple of programming notes - there's a "Legally Blonde 3" movie currently in production, so keep an eye out for that.  Jeez, it seems that as soon as I get caught up on a franchise, they announce another sequel.  That's what happened with the "Scream" movies last year.  Is another "Twilight" or "Hunger Games" movie on some studio's schedule?  Maybe that's the key, if I want to see more films made in a franchise, I should just watch what's out there, because irony dictates that I'll never be totally caught up, despite watching the latest "Terminator" "Godzilla" and "Bill & Ted" movies last year.  Let me know what franchises you'd like to see resurrected, and I'll do what I can. 

Also, since this film is about animal rights, don't forget that this year's Puppy Bowl is coming up on February 13 - I'm going to set my DVR for it today.  Don't worry, there are no other big events happening that day that you'll miss by tuning in to the Puppy Bowl, I can almost guarantee this.  JK - just DVR the SuperBowl and watch it later for the ads, like I do.  

I think I'm in the clear with this one, because in addition to her adventures in D.C., Elle Woods spends a fair amount of time here planning her wedding, and we do see the wedding at the end of the film - so I think there's just enough "rom" in this rom-com to justify including it.  Watching it here is not a mistake, at least, not for this reason.  But I'll admit the romance is not the primary focus here, not when there's the cause of animal rights to fight for, along with an explanation of how underhanded and manipulative the legislative process is in America, and how badly it's in need of fixing if a representative can be so tied up in her secret deals that she ends up pulling her support away from the bill that SHE introduced herself. Once again, I plead ignorance, but does this happen?  I've become more of an expert in the past two years (six years, really) in how Congressional bills work, or more often, fail to, and honestly I'm still working with most of my knowledge coming from that Schoolhouse Rock "I'm Just a Bill" song. Still I feel confident in calling a NITPICK POINT here, because an elected Representative from Massachusetts would probably know her own agenda from the get-go, and if she were controlled by corporate interests who wanted her to kill a particular piece of legislation, my guess is that she would KNOW that earlier in the process, and never sponsor the bill in the first place. Right?  

(I don't know, is there a tie-in here with recent events concerning Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema, consistently voting against their own party? It's not like they were FOR the Build Back Better bill and then against it, I think in the case of DINOs and RINOs we pretty much know where they stand, serving their own self-interests, but these two congresspeople still cause me a lot of head-scratching. Do they just want to be wooed, do they want something special from the bill in question to bring back dollars to their constituents, or are they just trying to be contrary?  How can you call yourself a Democrat if your voting is aligned with the other party?  Who does this help in the long run? I've given up, more or less, I can't figure it out.)

Elle Woods still annoys me, however, I still can't stomach her optimism, because she just keeps forging ahead with that sunny California attitude and she doesn't let anything stop her, for the most part.  She still has to fail before she succeeds, but that's just so the movie can provide us with some kind of "always darkest before the dawn" situation, that's Movie 101, Act 5 of the six-act structure practically demands it.  You can't just have a movie where people succeed, we've all determined that's boring - they have to FAIL and success needs to seem impossible, like they have to get all the way to Mount Doom and it still needs to look hopeless before it isn't, and the giant eagles swoop in with Gandalf riding one to sweep up.  So this animal rights bill is doomed to fail before it succeeds, in order to fit with a movie formula that's worked, time and time again.  Don't believe me? Watch 4,000 movies in a row your own damn self and then we'll see if you agree. 

By the same token, Elle has to get fired from the Boston law firm, in order to set her sights on Washington.  She had to lose the first boyfriend in order to get a better one.  And she had to risk losing her Boston wedding in order to set up the possibility of getting married somewhere else - once you figure out the formula, you can apply it everywhere - but the down side is, then you're going to be aware of the formula, and you'll see little else.  Still, there are a couple of notable reversals here, like one character mistaken as a villain who turns out to be very helpful for Elle's cause, and then another character - played by an actress who is NEVER EVER cast as a villain - turning out to have a hidden agenda. That was pretty cool, the rest is all fairly formulaic, though. We've seen the "we need X number of votes, we need X number of people to sign this petition" stuff before, and you'll never see it done better than on "The West Wing", so why even try?  

The only part that seemed ahead of its time, really, was the tracking down of Bruiser's mother, because I think in 2003 genetic sequencing and genealogy of dogs was a technology that was in its infancy.  But even now, when doggie DNA tests are widespread on the internet, I think the best they can tell you is exactly what breed(s) your mutt is made of, I doubt they can tell you, "Oh, your dog's mother lives in the Boston area."  So we have to suspend disbelief a little bit here, also the fact that a regular private detective would even know how or be willing to investigate this, back in 2003. And what are the odds that Elle's California dog would have a mother in Boston, where Elle & Bruiser just HAPPENED to be at that moment?  Very unlikely, because, you know, the U.S.A. turns out to be pretty big, and there are a LOT of dogs.  Super NITPICK POINT there, sorry.  (I'm not even going to address whether dogs can have sexual orientations as seen here, I'm just not qualified to comment.)

What happened to Selma Blair's character? I thought they became besties in the first film, but maybe that actress wasn't available for the sequel?  Or was she smart enough to turn it down?  Either way, it makes my linking a little more difficult that neither she nor Victor Garber had roles in the sequel - of course I came up with a plan, it just took a little more effort, that's all, and it's going to leave at least one film stranded in advance of next year's chain. 

Also starring Luke Wilson, Jennifer Coolidge, Jessica Cauffiel, Alanna Ubach, Bruce Thomas, James Read, Tane McClure (all carrying over from "Legally Blonde"), Sally Field (last seen in "Spielberg"), Regina King (last seen in "Higher Learning"), Bruce McGill (last seen in "The Best of Enemies"), Dana Ivey (last seen in "The Color Purple"), Mary Lynn Rajskub (last seen in "Night School"), J. Barton, Stanley Anderson (last seen in "Proof of Life"), Bob Newhart (last seen in "Richard Pryor: Omit the Logic"), Ruth Williamson (last seen in "The Family Man"), Jack McGee (last seen in "Father Figures"), Sam Pancake, Octavia Spencer (last seen in "Thunder Force"), James Urbaniak (last seen in "Cinema Verite"), Lauren Cohn (last seen in "Morning Glory"), Dale Waddington, Josh Holland, Jackie Hoffman (last seen in "Birdman"), Erin Cottrell, with cameos from Desi Lydic (last seen in "Irresistible"), Masi Oka and archive footage of James Stewart (last seen in "MLK/FBI")

RATING: 3 out of 10 warm fuzzies in the Snap Cup

Legally Blonde

Year 14, Day 39 - 2/8/22 - Movie #4,040

BEFORE: Selma Blair carries over from "Feast of Love", and I know what you're thinking - HOW could he NOT have seen "Legally Blonde" before?  Everyone in America has seen "Legally Blonde" at some point, right?  Well, if I'm being honest, it might have happened. Probably I did see it, only it was before I started this blog, and that means it was over 4,000 movies ago - and I don't remember a single thing about it. Both this film and its sequel ran on premium cable a few months back, so I was going to put them on DVD either way, but then the question became, do I add this to my watchlist, or not?  I was torn - so it was kind of in, but with a question mark, or an asterisk.  The deciding factor then became that I needed it for linking purposes, after dropping those Andie MacDowell films and a couple others, I had no other way to get from here to THERE, and that's kind of important if I don't want to break the chain.  So, Andie's out (for now) and Reese is in - and I can move forward with conclusive proof that I HAVE seen this film, it's now on the legal record.  I've been in this situation before with films like "Breakfast of Champions", and more recently, "Walking and Talking".  It's become part of my life, I need to be able to look at the IMDB app on my phone and say, "Oh, yes, I've seen that one, and here's the proof."  Better to be sure than unsure, right? 

THE PLOT: Elle Woods, a fashionable sorority queen, is dumped by her boyfriend. She decides to follow him to law school. While she is there, she figures out that there is more to her than just looks. 

AFTER: Ugh, I'm not really a fan of this franchise, maybe that's why the first viewing didn't really stick in my mind the first time I watched this, if indeed I have watched this, back in the before-times. I sort of WANT to like this, but Elle Woods as a central character is just annoyingly perfect, even when she's wrong or misguided about something, she's still got that perky, spunky attitude, and just like Lou Grant once said, "I hate spunk."  He was referring to Mary Richards, of course, but the principle remains the same.  California girls, sorority girls, fashionistas, all this is just so not my realm.  But it's a movie franchise that's now woven into the fabric of America, so I'll just have to grit my teeth and bear it, just for one night.  God knows, I've watched a lot worse. (What WON'T I watch at this point, just to clear the board, that's a very valid question.)

Now, the plan was to watch both "Legally Blonde" and "Legally Blonde 2" in one go, but last night I kept falling asleep about 2/3 of the way through the first film, and that's NOT a good sign.  I must have missed a scheduled dose of Mountain Dew, that's been known to happen - a combination of lack of caffeine and a film that I'm not really into, and you can bet I'll be dozing off. Then I wake up, rewind back to where I left off, and then I know I'm going to make it, but just knowing this relaxes me, and I fall back asleep again. I repeat this a few times, then I give up.

But like Elle Woods, I'm going to try to say something positive here, it does feel like maybe some screenwriter did some research into law school, which is unusual - usually a screenwriter will just try to change the way school works in order to make the movie work.  Elle's not going to law school for the right reasons - you should never change your whole life-plan around just to save a relationship - but the whole point of the film is that she ends up doing the right thing, even if it's for the wrong reasons.  She ultimately decides that the relationship isn't worth it, because the college boyfriend was so callous and douche-like, but by then she was already on this new career path in law school, and she found ways to excel at it, learned to apply herself on the LSATs and speak up in class, put in the time and do the coursework, and these are all positive things.  A good message for the kids, even if it's an unrealistic depiction of how hard Harvard Law really is, or how hard it is to gain admission there.  

Ultimately it's a fish-out-of-water story about a "Malibu Barbie" trying to fit in at an Ivy League school, but who's to say it couldn't happen?  Beyond self-confidence, she's got her sorority connections and a ton of fashion and beauty expertise, and gosh darn it, what a coincidence that those are the things necessary to poke holes in the testimony of a murder trial.  We allowed that in "My Cousin Vinny", with Marisa Tomei's character's knowledge of motor vehicle parts, and if you can allow that as a precedent, then you kind of have to accept that here.  I guess. 

Hey, at least this film shows a young woman applying herself, even if that means hiring a Coppola (which one?) to make a college admissions video for her, and even if she's wearing a bikini for most of that video (is this still as socially acceptable as it was back in 2001?  Discuss.). Will a 4.0 GPA from "California University" get you in to Harvard if your major is fashion? Honestly, I have no idea. I work right near the Fashion Institute of Technology in Manhattan, and it took me a while to reconcile the words "Fashion" and "Technology" living so close together in that school's name.  Do first-year law interns get to work on murder cases?  I have no idea about this either, so there are many potential NITPICK POINTS here, I just don't have the resources to call them out.  

But let's just focus on the relationship aspect of this film, for now - it's important that Elle learns the truth about the boyfriend she followed to Harvard, that he's a "shallow bonehead", so that even when he wants to take her back, it's a no-go.  She met a better boyfriend along the way, somebody she worked closely with on the murder case, and even though he's not part of the Greek fraternity system, she's willing to give love another try.  And in the end, isn't that the most important thing?   

I still don't think this film is meant to be taken seriously, not to any reasonable degree, not with that last-second breakdown on the witness stand, thanks to Elle's superior cross-examination, but I think for now I'll just let sleeping chihuahuas lie and move on - if I can double-up today and just get through "Legally Blonde 2" then I can move on to better movies (hopefully) and still not break the chain.  We could also get into some debate over whether this does, in fact, constitute a rom-com, but does it really matter?  It's going to get me through February, and right now, that's all that matters. 

Quick update, Amanda Brown, the author of the book this is based on, DID go to law school, but at Stanford, not Harvard, and she had trouble fitting in, much like Elle's character.  She wrote letters back home about this process, turned that into a book manuscript, and that eventually got turned into this movie.  And maybe the biggest NITPICK POINT I have here is that I don't think college kids at Harvard play football, not even an informal pick-up game on the quad - it's just not their thing, wouldn't you think all the students there are either too geeky or too busy for this? I mean, the school doesn't even have a TEAM, right?  Wait, they do?  I stand corrected. 

Also starring Reese Witherspoon (last seen in "Everything Is Copy"), Luke Wilson (last seen in "The Goldfinch"), Matthew Davis, Victor Garber (last seen in "Big Game"), Jennifer Coolidge (last seen in "Like a Boss"), Holland Taylor (last seen in "Bill & Ted Face the Music"), Ali Larter, Jessica Cauffiel (last seen in "Stuck on You"), Alanna Ubach (last seen in "The Last Word"), Oz Perkins, Linda Cardellini (last seen in "Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed"), Bruce Thomas (last seen in "Hall Pass"), Meredith Scott Lynn (last seen in "Forces of Nature"), Raquel Welch (last seen in "How to Be a Latin Lover"), Samantha Lemole (last seen in "Inherent Vice"), Kimberly McCullough, Shannon O'Hurley (last seen in "Copycat"), Greg Serano, Francesca P. Roberts (last seen in "In Good Company"), James Read, Tane McClure, Allyce Beasley, Kevin Cooney, 

RATING: 5 out of 10 items in a prison gift basket (yeah, that's probably not allowed...)

Feast of Love

Year 14, Day 38 - 2/7/22 - Movie #4,039

BEFORE: Well, it's Day 7 of the romance chain and I've watched three films with Liev Schreiber, followed by three films with Freddie Prinze Jr. - so now, how about three films with Selma Blair?  She carries over from "Down to You".  This film was part of the original February plan, but I was going to follow this one with "Dinner With Friends", starring Greg Kinnear - only that's part of the section of the chain with a couple Andie MacDowell films that are only on iTunes, not cable or streaming, so that 5-film section has been postponed until next year, maybe.  

It may look difficult to link romance movies like this, but it's really not - I see a lot of the same actors and actresses over and over, so it ends up being fairly simple.  I only really need to make adjustments when something like that happens, and a few films aren't readily available, then I just need to shuffle them around a bit.  Getting the "right" film to land on Valentine's Day itself is a bit trickier, but I've got a plan to make that happen this year, I just need to double-up tomorrow on my day off, and everything should fall into place from there.  

Here's what's difficult - watching 40 romance films this year and not getting burned out on the topic of love and relationships. It's bound to happen, though, after watching 20 I'll probably be desperate for an action film with a lot of explosions in it.  Here's what else is difficult - crossing about half of my romance-themed films off my list, and then still having enough material to make a chain NEXT year.  Right now, I just don't see how that's going to happen, after this chain I'm going to have a bunch of little 2-film or 3-film pieces that aren't going to connect to each other, and a lot of singles, or "loosies".  How the hell am I going to link them together into something coherent in 2023?  It might not be possible - but hey, that's what I thought last year, too.  

But once this year's romance chain is over, I'll start collecting new films to fill in the gaps, and if I come up short, next year I can always just do a small love chain and then celebrate Black History Month in February for once, instead of April or May or whenever I manage to link to that topic.

THE PLOT: A meditation on love and an exploration of its magical, mysterious and sometimes painful incarnations, set within a community of friends in Oregon.

AFTER: There's something that feels very fakey about a lot of rom-coms, or even romantic dramas, just because everything always seems to work out, even if it's in a wacky way. Just looking at the 6 films that have come before this one, you can almost count on couples getting back together and being happy, even if they've broken up once before, or twice, or three times... And then having to make the tough choice about which Ivy League school to attend, like the lead in "She's All That", well, that's not really much of a PROBLEM, is it?  Same goes for "Down to You", where a character faced the tough choice of either becoming a successful French chef in San Francisco, or hosting a travel-based cooking show with his famous father - I think he'll probably be all right, no matter what he decides.  And even the neurotic New Yorkers in "Walking and Talking" managed to get married or back together with their exes, so that should keep them out of therapy, at least for a while.  

But are these problems resolutions realistic?  No, probably not at all.  "Feast of Love" took a different tactic, showing people with real problems, valid concerns and facing tough situations that DON'T seem to have easy answers.  Harry, the older pseudo-narrator, has been married to Esther for many years, and they're still aching from the death of their son. Though they care for each other a great deal, they're also aware that their time on this planet is limited, and at some point, one will have to carry one without the other.  There's just no solution for that - when you've got more years behind you than ahead of you, you just have to come to terms with it.  Breaking up with your long-time partner isn't an option, because the plan was to ride it out until the end, as painful as that may become for, well, one or both of them.  

Bradley Smith, Harry's friend who runs a Portland coffee shop, has to face the end of his marriage, after his wife of four years bonds with another player during a women's softball game.  Yeah, if I'd known that part of the plot I might have avoided this film, because anything like that just tends to remind me about my first marriage - just replace "softball" with "Dungeons & Dragons", and then it hits a bit too close to home for me.  So I feel you, Bradley, there's not really anything you can do about it when your wife starts making out with another woman - at that point, the tighter you try to hold on to her, the faster she's going to run out the door, just trust me on this one.  But Bradley's not really all that observant, this other relationship started right under his nose - plus his wife has a fear of dogs, and he somehow then thought a quick visit to an animal shelter and getting her a dog as a birthday gift would solve this problem, but no, it only made things worse between them.  (PRO TIP: If you're counting on a birthday present or a Valentine's gift to "fix" things, you're probably wasting your time. True relationships are based on listening, communication and helping out around the house, not gifts, even if they're nice ones.)

The third couple in this ensemble relationship film (which could easily have been called "Portland, I Love You" and been part of that franchise with New York, Paris, Rio and Berlin) is Oscar and Chloe, who both work at Bradley's coffee joint.  Oscar's a former addict with a dead mother and a drunk, violent father, and Chloe's an orphan who's new in town and has a belief in astrology and a soft spot for recovering addicts and troubled souls.  Well, there's a lid for every pot, as my friend Amy in Portland once said. (I've been to Portland, Oregon three times, twice on business trips and once for that friend's wedding.  The third trip was the best because I visited Voodoo Donuts and a food truck park, I called it the "Porklandia" trip because I had pork or bacon with every meal, yes, even on the donuts.)

In all of this relationship stuff, the bad is balanced with the good - and this feels much more "real" somehow, more than your average rom-com.  Doesn't it make sense that there would be some kind of balance in the universe, that everyone's life is a mix of good and bad, ups and downs, romances and heartbreaks?  Your mileage may vary, as usual, but nobody has the perfect life, and into each life, some rain must fall - Portland has a reputation as being a very rainy city, but the residents there will be quick to tell you that's it only the 16th rainiest city in the U.S.  It might rain a LITTLE bit on 160 or so out of every 365 days, but for total rain volume, both Miami and New Orleans have Portland beat, by a wide margin. Where were we?  Oh, yeah, balancing the good and the bad in life.  Look, I'm not saying you have to be focused on the fact that every relationship ends, sooner or later, one way or the other, but you have to at least acknowledge that, and come to terms with it.  

Here's the problem with movie break-ups, though, even in "Feast of Love" - they tend to show a spouse removing their wedding ring, handing it over, and walking out the door, as if that's all it takes.  Oh, no, no, no, that's just the start of the process.  What about all their stuff?  Furniture, clothing, their books and their record collection?  Who gets that autographed book that they both waited in line for?  Who gets the vinyl album of Meat Loaf's "Bat Out of Hell", and who gets the CD copy?  Who gets to keep living in the house they bought together, and who has to find a new apartment?  Worse, nobody PLANS for this to happen, it tends to be a rather hasty decision, so it's a rush job and stuff's going to get left behind, and then it's going to be awkward to come back and get it later - but you never SEE this in a Hollywood movie, and "Feast of Love" glosses over this, not once but TWICE.  And then there's the paperwork of divorce, meetings with lawyers or mediators - thank God nobody in this film who got divorced had kids, because that's probably twice as complicated.  I had to hire a real-estate lawyer JUST to get my ex-wife's name off the mortgage for the condo, and thankfully she was a good lawyer and she made it happen.  I had to then pay her half of what we'd both invested in the property, had to get a roommate to raise that money, and then I was clear.  I sold the condo 8 years later for four times the original value and bought a house with my second wife, so that was a smart decision in the long run.  

Bradley only had to worry about that dog he bought for his wife - he brought it over to his sister's house for a few days before the disastrous birthday gift, and by then the rescue dog had bonded with his nephew.  Only a real rat would take the dog away from the family it bonded with, but that's what Bradley did. I get it, he'd rather live with a dog than live alone - living alone in any house can drive you a little crazy, I had my cat, Merlin to keep my company, thank God, but it was still a rough few months for me.  But I moved on, and so did Bradley - he bought the house next to Harry, on the recommendation of his new girlfriend/real-estate agent, only Harry then informed him that the house was "bad luck" because he'd seen three couples in a row move into the house, then break up shortly after.  Probably just a coincidence - real estate can't be "cursed", right?  Or, can it?  

(Speaking of cursed or haunted houses, I was trying to second guess this movie, and I considered the possibility that Harry's wife, Esther, wasn't really there, like she was either a ghost or just his memory of her, because she's mostly homebound, and it's a long time before she interacts with any other characters in the film, other than Harry.  So it was possible, but the movie didn't go in that direction, this wasn't directed by M. Night Shyamalan. Hmm, what WOULD a romance film directed by him be like, I wonder...)

Meanwhile, Chloe and Oscar decide to get their own place, because Oscar's father keeps drinking too much and threatening them, it's just not safe.  But it's hard, even in Portland, to get a house if both members of the couple work at a coffee shop, I guess. (It's not even a Starbucks, it's an independent coffee joint, not a big corporate one.).  Bradley gets his real-estate girlfriend (who's got plenty of problems of her own, where relationships are concerned...) to help them find a place they can afford, but even then, they feel they have to make a porno tape to pay for a house, and Oscar's drunk dad keeps coming over to threaten Chloe and stab their groceries.  It's not a good situation.  

There are more twists and turns in these characters' lives, but I've probably given away too much already.  Portland's a nice town, but it's apparently also tough on relationships. Personally, I blame women's softball, but maybe that's just me.  The director of this film, Robert Benton, also directed "Kramer vs. Kramer", "Places in the Heart", "Billy Bathgate" and "Nobody's Fool", back in the day, but "Feast of Love" will probably turn out to be his last film, he's still alive but he's like 90 years old now. 

Also starring Morgan Freeman (last seen in "Lucky Number Slevin"), Greg Kinnear (last seen in "Brigsby Bear"), Radha Mitchell (last seen in "The Frozen Ground"), Billy Burke (last seen in "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2"), Alexa Davalos (last seen in "Defiance"), Toby Hemingway (last seen in "In Time"), Stana Katic (last heard in "Superman: Unbound"), Erika Marozsan, Jane Alexander (last seen in "The Cider House Rules"), Fred Ward (last seen in "Swing Shift"), Margo Martindale (last seen in "Instant Family"), Missi Pyle (last seen in "Still Waiting..."), Shannon Lucio, Alex Mentzel, Julie Vhay, Tobias Anderson. 

RATING: 6 out of 10 tarot cards

Down to You

Year 14, Day 37 - 2/6/22 - Movie #4,038

BEFORE: Freddie Prinze Jr. carries over from "Head Over Heels", and this third romance with him is really in a prime position, because whatever film comes after yesterday's disaster, it's going to probably look like the "Citizen Kane" of romance films by comparison.  Anything's got to be better than that one, right?

It's funny how this works, just two weeks ago I was deep into the Bruce Willis/50 Cent action movie chain, and I was so burned out on action movies, they were just washing over me with little effect.  Now I'll probably get burned out on romance films before Valentine's Day, in a week or so they'll just wash over me with little effect.  But I just have to persist, put my head down and keep going, hoping things will improve somehow.  

THE PLOT: A young man wins and loses the first serious love of his life.  Al Connelly falls in love with the girl of his dreams, but after the summer she breaks up with him.  As he tries to recover, Al goes to desperate measures. 

AFTER: Well, this one kind of works because it stays within the scope of reality, there are no weirdly exploding toilets or Russian gangsters or people messing up priceless works of art in the name of restoration.  No sex with dogs, either, so that's a plus - this film's situations feel like they are based on things that could actually happen, like pregnancy scares or being an extra in a porn movie's crowd scenes, or having a sexual fantasy about somebody who isn't your regular partner.  This all could be based on specific actual events.

Two people meet at a college bar, he's a sophomore and she's a freshman, and they bond over what song to play on the jukebox, and then start dating, and three months later, they're deep in love.  The only thing that seems unrealistic is the way they both talk to the camera, as if they're being interviewed about their relationship - it's a common framing device, but it also could happen, sometimes they make documentaries where they ask people about their relationships, right?  Then the omniscient universal camera takes over and we flash back to see those things taking place when they happened.  It's still not "real", but it's a bit more real than four models living together for free and just by coincidence having an apartment with a view of another character's apartment, and he never ever closes the blinds.  

These characters eat a lot of cake together, and never gain any weight, sure, that's a bit unrealistic but hey, it's still a movie.  Al's studying liberal arts at this unnamed NYC college, but he wants to pursue a career as a chef specializing in French cuisine and Imogen is an art student (just like Laney in "She's All That") and they get closer together and have the infamous "birthday sex" after spending a private night in an art gallery.  But things start to fall apart when Al keeps his promise to be an extra in a movie crowd scene, and Imogen wonders why he'd rather do that than spend the evening with her. (Because it's not ALL about you, honey, that's why...)  After spending a summer in France, though, Imogen comes back and things between her and Al are different somehow.  Her cousin in France asked if she would be getting married soon, and that set off a whole thing, bringing her fears about being a mother to the surface. If they don't learn to talk about things like this, this relationship seems doomed and they don't even realize it.

The tables get turned later when Imogen agrees to design an album cover for a male friend, and Al wonders if she's getting too close to that guy - but petty jealousy at this point will only push her closer to that other person, trust me on this one.  Meanwhile, Al's father, a famous TV chef, wants to do a reality show with him, where they tour the country together and visit random regular people to improve their cooking.  He wants it to be like "Cops" (which must have been the most popular TV show of all in the year 2000, yeah, that sounds about right) but he wasn't that wrong - this proposed show sounds a bit like "Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives", where Guy Fieri tours the country and often has his son with him, visiting restaurants.  But this opportunity is yet another thing that seems to be driving the couple apart.  A car accident after a picnic in the county seems to be the final sign that things are ending, but sometimes isn't an accident just an accident?  Not everything needs to be a metaphor...

Oh, right, the pregnancy scare.  That's probably the real reason for the break-up, even though Al is very supportive and buys the home test kit, it's something Imogen has to do herself, it's her issue.  Hey, not every woman's cut out to be a mother, it's OK especially if that whole child thing feels like it's more than that person can handle.  There are already plenty of people in the world, one less isn't going to make much difference. You've got to take care of yourself first before you can take care of another human, anyway.  But Imogen deals with the situation by cheating on Al and then moving to San Francisco - that's one way to go, I guess.  Al is suddenly a free-wheeling bachelor again, he explores a new relationship but that fizzles out, too.  He's got nothing to do but get back in touch with his friends and go bar-hopping for a while.  But before long he's hitting the really hard stuff, which turns out to be Imogen's brand of shampoo - and this is not a recommended way to deal with heartbreak. 

Eventually Imogen returns from San Francisco where she'd carved out a career as an artist illustrating book covers.  Since they've both grown as people since the break-up (OK, well, ONE of them has...) they decide to explore giving it another try.  But it means making changes, forgiving each other, and there's no guarantee it's all going to work out, but it seems to be worth a shot. They can't really start over from scratch, but if that's what they want to tell themselves in order to be happy, I'm OK with it.  Just one little NITPICK POINT, if Imogen's flight back to S.F. is really in two hours, she should ALREADY be on the way to the airport.  In New York, no matter where you are, it takes one hour MINIMUM to get to an airport, no matter how you get there, and they say you should arrive at least two hours before your flight.  I like to leave the house three or four hours before take-off, just to be on the safe side. 

Also starring Julia Stiles (last seen in "Hustlers"), Selma Blair (last heard in "Scream 2"), Shawn Hatosy (last seen in "Alpha Dog"), Zak Orth (last seen in "Music and Lyrics"), Ashton Kutcher (last seen in "Killers"), Rosario Dawson (last seen in "Fire with Fire"), Henry Winkler (last seen in "The French Dispatch"), Lucie Arnaz (last seen in "Robert Klein Still Can't Stop His Leg"), Lauren German, Zay Harding, Amanda Barfield, Chloe Hunter, Granger Green, Jed Rhein, Joseff Stevenson, Bradley Pierce (last seen in "The Borrowers" (1997)), Lola Glaudini (last seen in "Jack Goes Boating"), Mary Wigmore (last seen in "Chuck & Buck"), Alexia Landeau (last seen in "Kicking and Screaming"), Jennifer Albano, Chris Desmond, Susan Blommaert (last seen in "John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum"), Frank Wood (last seen in "In America"), Joanna P. Adler (last seen in "An American Pickle"), Mark Blum (last seen in "Shattered Glass"), with cameos from Adam Carolla (last seen in "Still Waiting..."), Jimmy Kimmel (last seen in "The Last Blockbuster"). 

RATING: 5 out of 10 Revolutionary War soldiers (in a porn movie?)