| Overall Grade: |
C- |
|
| Story: |
C- |
|
|
| Acting: |
C |
|
|
| Direction: |
D+ |
|
|
| Visuals: |
C |
|
|
Feeble Rom Com on Online Matchmaking Novelty
by Ed (movies profile)
Nov 8, 2006
6
of
6 people found this review helpful
It seems a shame that a movie starring two of the more likable screen actors today, Diane Lane and John Cusack, would end up being such an overly deliberate Hollywood contrivance. Although the film topically addresses the world of online matchmaking, it doesn't feel relevant given the tendency toward convention. It's not too surprising to find out that this is the product of TV sitcom director-writer Gary David Goldberg as it feels like there is an absent laugh track with pauses after certain line readings to make room for the gales of laughter that never really come. This is the type of movie that depends on a sing-along with "The Partridge Family" theme song for a nostalgic guffaw.
The story centers on Sarah, an attractive, fortyish woman freshly divorced and prodded by her meddlesome family to start dating again. I think it could have helped if Lane, wallowing in self-doubt and analysis paralysis, did not play such a similar character in last year's "Under the Tuscan Sun". This time she's a pre-school teacher with - surprise! - a love for dogs. As is routine with this sort of set-up, Sarah is surrounded by stock characters - an acid-tongued, married older sister, Carol, who submits Sarah's online profile behind her back; a bromide-spouting father with a brogue that would make Barry Fitzgerald wince; a gay colleague with a heart of gold; and Bob, a recently separated man who may or may not have the best intentions in pursuing Sarah. Complicating matters is Jake, an iconoclastic, "Doctor Zhivago"-loving boat-builder who immediately falls for Sarah.
Even though Lane is as lovely as usual (and constantly reminded of this by her family) and Cusack seems to default easily back to his Lloyd Dobler role in "Say Anything", it's hard to see why Jake falls for Sarah given her continuing trepidation, but alas, that seems to be the only viable point of conflict in the plot since there is so little character development. A sturdy supporting cast is wasted - Elizabeth Perkins back to second-banana status as the sister; Christopher Plummer somewhere between twinkly philosopher and aging lothario as the father; Dermot Mulroney whose character Bob is made so inconsistent as to render his subplot confusing; Ben Shenkman irritating as Jake's sleazy lawyer best friend and Stockard Channing sorely misused as a trailer-park hippie woman infatuated with Sarah's father.
Granted there are a few chuckles (for example, when they careen through town hunting for a condom), the movie feels disjointed with scenes that simply stop and start with little sense of plot development other than getting to its inevitable ending. Goldberg doesn't have the sensibilities of a Cameron Crowe to get away with such an eccentric cast of characters, and the plot just feels overloaded with clichés. Even with Lane and Cusack, the film should sadly be passed over. |
My Public Profile 
