Scripted love may have been better (perhaps they need to rethink)
341356
This book was not great in the scheme of love stories. I really don't know if the writer set out with a clear idea when constructing this story as it lacked any interesting plot twists of characters.
4909866
This is a cute, clean romance, but the "misunderstanding" was silly and unrealistic. No woman would go thru with marrying a complete stranger just because his kisses "turned her brain to mush" -- at least no woman who had a brain to start with. But the story of the mix-up was creative and cute, so I can deal with the fantasy. I would have preferred a little more realistic beginning to their romance, though -- like maybe him meeting the new teacher and falling in love, even though he already had a mail-order fiancee -- I'm sure things like that really did happen.
2596533
It just wasn't that believeable that a couple could miss it that many times. It just wasn't believeable that Miranda and Alex would have made the choices they did. It just wasn't believeable, or even enjoyable.
2085354
I had read an article once in which Baz Luhrmann said that the trick to making his extravagant musicals is to take the most simplistic story and to animate it with songs and sets, thereby giving it oomph and life.

It seems that Hollywood romantic comedies these days function with similar criteria in mind: take the most simplistic story of a boy-meets-girl-falls-in-love-with-girl-because-the-girl-doesn't-love-him-back and set it in extraordinary circumstances. The trend seems to necessary extend to including the characters that must have something grand to fight for and to have love conquer it all. In Love and Other Drugs, Edward Zwick, the director of legendary TV shows thirtysomething and My So-Called Life (and my personal favorites Relativity and Once and Again) asks his characters to have the kind of love that battles Parkinson's disease.

Although it's noble and wonderful to have this huge emotion of love be the cure for diseases and the reason for world peace, it seems that the French have it better. The French romantic dramedies aren't about saving the world, one relationship at a time; instead they are about characters that most resemble real people, people who have the smallest problems and the smallest inclinations for a sliver of happiness. In non-Hollywood cinema, the story hardly needs to be grand, the only criteria is that the audience cares for the characters.

Unfortunately, it's very hard to truly care for the characters of Zwick's latest film, the script for which was adapted from Jamie Reidy's Hard Sell: The Evolution of a Viagra Salesman. Even though it takes two hours to tell their story, the viewer hardly knows who these characters are and is instead told to believe that they go through this momentous transformation by having met each other.

The characters are poorly written and the actors who portray them struggle to bring their characters the honesty and the veracity that the storyline demands. Anne Hathaway is quite impressive, but often too much like her The Devil Wears Prada character, as a 26-year-old girl battling Parkinson's disease while trying to go about her daily life. In the end, Hathaway, who plays Maggie Murdock, an attractive, careless free spirit who doesn't have the freedom from her disease or from her unrealistic expectations of herself, doesn't elicit more than a forethought.

Jake Gyllenhaal is Jamie Randall, a drug rep set on sleeping with anything that has the necessary female body parts. Gyllenhaal has never been sexier than in his role here but he is still short of being a convincing leading man. Gyllenhaal, whose talent is unquestionable (watch Donnie Darko, The Good Girl or Proof for a showcase of his acting skills), doesn't fit the role of a sly, sex maniac, and failed med student who uses hard sell techniques to get laid. In fact, I would almost be inclined to say that Gyllenhaal was miscast in his part here.

Zwick's direction is ever-present. In one scene, Anne Hathaway squats and then leans across to Gyllenhaal, who is sitting in the bathtub. One can just see the director handing out directions of lean left, lean right, don't forget the audience is looking this way in that scene. That's one of the many instances in the film where the action feels unnatural - too staged, too rehearsed, too tried-and-true.

Except for some (arguably unnecessary) nudity between the leads, the too-tired-and-true routine is the story of the film, i.e., there's nothing new in the film that would add to either the genre of romantic dramedy or to Zwick's already extensive career list of adult romantic movies.

The film is set in 1996, and sadly, it doesn't seem that Edward Zwick has ever left that era.
2264067
I appreciate D.H. Franzoni's (a writer for this movie)review which seeks to enlighten us about the history used to construct this movie. I also applaud the moviemakers attempt to create a new perspective on a story that's been told many times.

With that in mind, I wanted to approach this movie with an open mind rather than judge it with one eye on the story we all know so well. Unfortunately, that wasn't enough to make me conclude this was a good movie.

First of all, the basic premise, that the legend of King Arthur was based on a roman with a similar name, was an interesting one. However, if the moviemakers are going to use history so faithfully, they shouldn't try to pepper the movie with modern day dialogue and personalities. The banter between the "knights" and especially Guinevere's behavior (particularly soon after a rather terrible ordeal that she was rescued from) seemed out of place. If the writers were so devoted to accuracy, why didn't they research how people related to one another and the true behavior of peasants of the era?

The dialogue sounding too modern and quippy at times serves to spoil the mood of the period which the moviemakers seemed to be trying so hard to be faithful to. Also, I just could not buy Guinevere being so forward all the time. Somehow I doubt most peasant women waltzed up to knights and questioned whether they believed in anything or that they made jokes about rape. Also, Guinevere's prowess with a bow soon after having her fingers (which were previous pushed out of joint for at least awhile during torture) was absurd. Additionally, if she were so kick ass, I doubt she'd have been captured and tortured in the first place. It seriously smacked of an attempt to create a more feminist version of the character which, again, seemed out of place.

Undermining the credibility of a desire for an accurate historical perspective wasn't enough to make the movie unenjoyable though it did make one feel there was some pandering to certain a certain demographic going on. The real problem is the movie moves too slowly and seems to linger lovingly on certain scenes for no reason. It's not that the scenes should have been shorter but some of them seemed unnecessary to the story's progress.

The only "good" thing about the movie was that it took elements of the mystical Arthurian legend and gave them a basis in potentially realistic occurences and that was interesting but not nearly enough to carry the movie. I guess that some might question whether or not such an attempt really holds any value for a classic tale steeped in magic and mysticism but I'm willing to give credit for the desire to do so even if the implementation on the whole didn't work very well.
1335900
My wife really likes this movie for all the reasons the producers intended it to appeal to her.  I thought it was cute, but from a more objective perspective sad.

Person A has a live-in girlfriend.  Person B has a live-in boyfriend.  Persons A & B do not love the person they are sleeping with, so initiate an emotional relationship with each other via email, lying to their respective lovers to keep it hidden from them.  Person A discovers the identity of Person B and realizes it is someone he hates in real life, nonetheless, he lies to her and continues the email relationship.  Eventually, by telling many more lies, he orchestrates circumstances to make Person B like him and then revels his identity as her email pen pal.  Best quote: Person B "I was hoping it was you" (cries).  Yep, that's the foundation for a really strong relationship.  I guess after the movie gets over they're going to move in together.  Hope they decide to disconnect AOL...
2690360
Pretending He's Mine puts a new spin on the old "pretend love turns real" trope by making the pair an actor and a casting director. My only problem is the FMC, at twenty-one seems to be a bit too young to be an accomplished casting director. Chemistry was definitely there, as they perceive each other as just the person they're looking for... if it wasn't pretense. The idea that their "client" may have reasons to "encourage" them to be a couple was definitely an interesting twist. At only 150 pages, it was a short but satisfying read.
3911230
We liked the idea of an old fashioned romance despite modernism, and in some says the film did deliver that.  But the sequencing of the scenes was sometimes hard to follow, and the characters we could not really feel at one with for some reason.  Some Christian films of late have been excellent.  This one has a ways to go.
1836206
Even though I give this film three stars it is a little better than OK. The concept is on point. The acting is OK. The script needs more work.  It's worth a viewing, maybe not so much owning if it costs more than $8.00 to own.

I like the concept of the film. The title has a double meaning. It is an issue that all races deal with. However, this is from the African-American perspective thus being geared towards this audience. I don't want to give any spoilers or plot details in case whoever reads this has not heard of the film. At heart it deals with not accepting who you are, not loving yourself as you are and thus lying to others to hide your true self. Any relationship built on a foundation of lies is going to crumble or implode eventually. When that happens all of those who are pulled into that lie will be devastated.

The main problem I have with this movie is that it deals with such a sensitive subject, especially within the black community, that the time allotted for the film was not sufficient to tell the story. I am not saying the movie needed to be a single three-hour session but maybe it would have been better served as a miniseries. It gives a little more time for the story to develop. Allow for better character development which probably would have resulted in better acting overall.

Living so close to the Philly area, the main plot of the movie has elements in it that I've heard rumors of over the years. One of the phrases I've heard people talking about before the movie even came so it kind of jarred me a little. This phrase may ring a bell with some or you can google it and see what pops up but it is a big clue, "You have a little dust in your eye. I can blow it out for you."

One last thing I will mention. The lead male character, the husband, made a major punk move near the end of the movie. It is something a lot of people try and end up doing once they are caught. It made me not like him at all. I had some compassion for him because he did struggle even through his selfishness but he at least seemed redeeming. When he tried to put others on blast because he'd been caught that was really weak of him. Not that these other people shouldn't be telling the truth but he wanted to tell their secrets so he would not go down alone. Proving that he was plain selfish in my opinion.
4720718
Love and relationships are a strange thing. Whatever our views on the subject may be I think we can all agree, we all go into a relationship expecting the best. But, what if, through some magical power, we could tell how a relationship would turn out just by looking at that person? This is what I was thinking about as I watched this movie.

 The film tells the story of a couple that eventually falls out of love and gets a divorce, but the film's gimmick is it is all told backwards. It is not told "Memento" backwards, where each scene is followed by what happened earlier instead the movie is divided in five chapters which are told in reverse order; their divorce, a party scene, the birth of their child, their wedding and finally the first time they met. This is how the movie gets its title. Five chapters about two people, get it?

 The movie is directed by Francois Ozon and I think it may be his best film. Here Ozon is dealing with characters and situations I can relate to. It is not the brainteaser "Swimming Pool" was or the fun silly lark "8 Woman" was either. Aesthecially and intelluctally this movie is better than the rest. If anything his "Under the Sand" may be of the same quality.

 The couple is played by Valeria Bruni Tedeschi (Marion) and Stephane Freiss (Gilles) neither is an actor I can recall seeing in anything else but it doesn't matter. It helped me believe in these people even more. In the opening scenes we can sense a lot of intensity, a lot of disgust and resentment seems to be in the air. As we watch we wonder what could have lead to this? But as the movie goes on, I found, that these people never really belonged together in the first. Which leads me back to my original thought, what if we had a magical way of knowing how a relationship would end? Would we use it? Some would argue no, meeting someone new and experiencing where things go is half the excitment and also what makes us grow. That may be true but I wonder if Marion and Gilles would agree?

 Bottom-line: Francois Ozon most effective film. It is a movie that is about more than its gimmick, it has a genuine deep story involving love and relationships.
2664781
This is a story about sacrifice and love.  How much would you sacrifice to keep the person you love from hurting? John and Sybille are drawn to each other with an undeniable passion. But Sybille believes whole heartedly in love and John does not. So when Sybille falls in love with John it causes them both a great deal of pain. But so does trying to stay away from each other. The emotions the author evokes as she describes Sybille's turmoil (1st POV), and Sybille's own descriptions of John's pain, leave you emotionally wrecked.

This was a reasonably well written story but there were a moderate number of typos and other errors. There was also a strange stilted quality to the diction in some parts. The heat level was about 2/10. The passion was talked about a lot, but the action was off camera.
2197645
I like the dynamic between the gay couple (Chad Allen and his partner) but wish the script was written better.  The actors can only do so much with what they are given to work with. A three star rating is a gift.
4322358
I'm a fan of Asian film... but not this. An extended love relationship outside of marriage is ended by accident. Sad enough, sadder still is that the film missed opportunities... for surviving family members to explore the complexities and discover substance in the lives of the dead lovers... and perhaps examine their own lives in the aftermath. A great premise for exploration of the human heart was treated as an assembly of hopeful and anguished romantic moments. To sweeten the mood, a secondary romance was pasted on top. The actors were fine, but couldn't salvage the disjointed footage. If you love a romantic tableau, or a series of them, this is for you. If you're looking a story well told, revealing more as it leads to a conclusion... look elsewhere.
2484354
I wasn't sure about this film but found the premise interesting. Although ambivalent about the ending, I found the comparative approach to illustrating how pornography and romance films both (albeit in very distinct ways) harbor the potential to distort relationship expectations compelling. The film does a much better job addressing the allure and function of pornography in the male character's life than it does fleshing out how romance films affect the female lead. This asymmetry has to do with the narration coming from within the male character and his perspective though; so the viewer only observes the external actions of the female character. As one might expect then, the female lead appears less complex than the male lead, but the "female experience" is expanded through the supporting female character. In addition, it might be noted that although consumption of pornography is mapped to the white US American male body, its desires, and its gender formation, and romance films to the white US American female body, its desires, and its gender formation, this stereotypical dichotomy and gendered understanding must be considered as an imposed frame. A more cynical attitude might write this film off as reinforcing a constellation of sexist ideologies, which it does in some ways no matter how generous an attitude one tries to hold. Still, the film includes some very insightful and interesting ways of thinking about how pornography functions in the imaginaries.
1132744
In real relationships, people say you can't change your partner's bad habits so I'm unsure how close to real this novel reflects the changes that occurred in the main character's aspergar like personality.  But, it spreads a little hope that in any relationship, with the right connections and chemistry a couple can propagate positive growth and independence away from the fears and insecurity that bind them to the same old routine and lack of real interaction with others.
389326
So, so.  It perhaps would have been slightly more interesting to know that it was based on true premise.
3897918
The film goes along well until the moments of revelation and reveal, and then the plot becomes contrived - it's a bit incredulous that the characters that loathe each other so much would suddenly fall so quickly and willingly into each other's arms and hearts.

The fault is not the actors', it's the script