|
Okay, I love romantic comedies about adults made for adults. There aren't that many made so I have to subsist on what few
movies the Hollywood studios send my way each year. I will plead guilty to cutting these movies a lot of slack because I wish
that there were more of them.
When I heard about John Cusack being paired with Diane Lane I was in heaven. It is hard to believe, but the very lovely
Diane Lane is now 40 years old while Cusack is about a year younger. They do make a great pair.
Casting John Cusack and Diane Lane in a romantic comedy is either a stroke of genius or entirely obvious since these two
eminently likable actors should have been paired together long before this. Since it hasn't been done before, I call it a
stoke of genius. My only wish is that these two wonderful actors will be cast in another romantic comedy far better than this
one. They deserve as much and so do we.
Why it took so long for these two eminently likable people to be paired together in a romantic comedy is beyond me. Here
is a romantic pairing that should be at least as good as Hugh Grant and Julia Roberts ("Notting Hill") and perhaps
even better than Tom Hanks and "America's (former) sweetheart," Meg Ryan ("Sleepless in Seattle" and "You've
Got Mail").
And if I should get the intelligent wit that is present in "When Harry Met Sally" with Billy Crystal and Meg
Ryan... Well, that would have been too much to hope for.
Unfortunately, not in this cinematic outing. It was too much to hope for.
"Must Love Dogs" initially appeared to be the adult romantic comedy of the summer with "Wedding Crashers"
relegated to a romantic comedy subset with its emphasis on juvenile, frat boy behavior. To its credit, "Wedding Crashers"
took their juvenile approach and freshened it up so that it had not one, but two romances filled with charm, originality,
and a lot of good humor.
"Must Love Dogs" stayed with its derivative initial premise and failed to develop any great romantic chemistry
between Cusack and Lane, who don't really connect until late in the picture.
The novelist, Claire Cook, and the script writer, Gary David Goldberg, didn't work very hard with the premise. Bad divorces
for Sarah and Jake with both being fleeced by their ex's. Now Sarah's ex is married again and his new wife is already pregnant.
What a bummer! And with her biological clock chiming away like there's no tomorrow. She's left all alone in a big house with
only family over to visit and the occasional stay over of her brother's large Newfoundland dog.
She is a teacher at a preschool. Awww. How cute. A chance to mug it up with a bunch of cute kids. And I would have thought
that a bunch of cute dogs would have been enough for one movie.
Jake makes racing sculls the old-fashioned way, which is with hand carved wood and not cheap aluminum. Do I hear the words,
"environmentally sensitive," here? Since these boats are far heavier than the new ones, they don't win any races.
Or sell. Jake lost everything to his ex, or he gave it away as his lawyer buddy complains, but somehow he is able to live
and work in a factory flat with nary a mention made of an eviction for unpaid rent.
If ever there were two actors who appeal to all segments of the population, then John Cusack and Diane Lane would be these
two people. Both are so natural in their personas that they immediately put us at ease. Both possess the appeal of a neighbor
or a friend who lives nearby. Cusack is both a leading man and a guy's guy who we would love to hang out with. While Diane
Lane is certainly a beautiful woman, she also has the natural beauty of a woman who lives next door or a girl we might see
on the metro.
The strength of "Must Love Dogs," besides the innate appeal of Cusack and Lane, is the warm portrait of her
supportive and very loving family. They all stick together and pull for her now that her former husband has left her for another
woman.
Elizabeth Perkins is wonderful as Carol, Sarah's cynical and worldly wise sister. Christopher Plummer truly "sparkles"
as Bill, their 71 year old dad with a twinkle still in his eyes. His eyes are also on the lookout for lovely ladies now that
his beloved wife of 46 years has passed on.
But it is Stockard Channing who steals the movie as "Dolly," one of Bill's three girlfriends. She is a turquoise-laden
babe probably handicapped by being much too close to his own age as well as being overweight. She is also "different."
Bill is urbane and dressed to a "T" while Dolly dresses like she owns a Harley.
The daughters are initially suspicious of her, but she wins them over her warmth and naturalness. She is truly a vulnerable
earth mother of a woman who has much love and life to give. If only the rest of the actors in this film were scripted with
her fire and passion.
My wife and I both enjoyed "Must Love Dogs," although she more than I. This is one of those movies, like Cusack's
2001 film, "Serendipity," which has modest pretensions and stars immensely likable people who exhibit great chemistry
when they finally get together. Both movies flesh out the romantic angle with interesting supporting characters, although
"MLD" is better at doing this. "Serendipity" is also hampered by a romantic premise that does try one's
patience as it is so senseless and illogical.
However, "MLD" is hampered by a trite story line and politically correct careers. There is no real conflict
in this film other than a manufactured one over Sarah's possible romantic interest in the father (Dermot Mulroney) of one
of her students.
Another small irritant is that Sarah's sister, Carol (Perkins), places the internet ad that describes her sister as being
"voluptuous." Good advertising, she says, as well as remarking that everybody does this.
I'm with her on this, but when Sarah and Jake first meet in the park, one of the first sentences out of his mouth is when
he questions her about her definition of "voluptuous." I got off the train on that one as I cannot believe that
Jake could ever really be so stupid and tactless as to bring this up before he even knows the girl. He, and every other red
blooded male in the human race in a similar situation, may wonder about this, but he wouldn't say anything if he knew what
was good for him.
There is nothing good that this question conveys. Either he is only interested in large breasted women or he is calling
her a liar. Scriptwriter Goldberg should have known that a "sensitive" guy like Jake would not have touched this
question with a ten foot pole. Smart men just don't go there.
This is only a small, "meet cute" film that will easily transfer to the small screen. But it could have been,
should have been, much more.
|
