As with all films, you have your supporters and your detractors... after a pretty darn positive review the other day of Richard Gere and Julia Roberts' latest... well we get this review that describes it in a quite a different light. So who's right? I don't know... neither... both... It just depends, both opinions are possible, so the only way to know for sure... is to see it yourself... right?
I was quite shocked by the positive review that was posted on AICN last Thursday from the RUNAWAY BRIDE test screening the day before on the Paramount lot. Although the movie is not an abomination, it is a major disappointment considering the talent involved.
The keyword here is DULL. The script has become infamous in Hollywood, having survived development hell for at least 6 years. Some of the writers who have toiled away include Sara Parriott and Josann McGibbon, Leslie (outrageous fortune) Dixon, and Audrey (truth about cats and dogs) Wells. Directors came and went, and numerous actresses flirted with the lead, including Sandra Bullock, Tea Leoni, and god help me, Ellen DeGeneres. The script was solid and intelligent, so it seemed a good idea to reunite the team from Pretty Woman -- Roberts, Gere, and god help me again, Garry Marshall (perpetrator of Beaches, Dear God, Exit to Eden, and of course Pretty Woman). Wrong.
I am not going to rehash the plot once again. Suffice to say that this was evidently the first test screening of the film, which brought out the googly-eyed Jonathan Dolgen (why not put him in a horror movie?) and the tight-skinned dragon lady Sherry Lansing. The movie is dull, dull, dull, running at a snail's pace for a full 2 hours without credits. Marshall's direction is strictly pedestrian and flat. The wide-screen cinematography is bland. The script, which on paper seemed sophisticated and smart, lacks surprise and spontaneity and most of all, charm.
How's the acting? Richard Gere wins the honors, giving a fun and engaging performance. Julia Roberts, on the other hand, has done this kind of role many times too many in the past and she appears to know it. Maybe with another actress playing the role of a flighty bride-to-be the part would have seemed fresher and less of a drag -- maybe Angelina Jolie or Renee Zellweger (or god help me Jenna Elfman)? With Julia in the part, we know what's going to happen 5 minutes into the movie and it takes WAY WAY WAY too long to get there.
As for the supporting cast, Hector Elizondo, in his customary supporting role in a Garry Marshall "film", steals his few scenes. Completely wasted is Joan Cusack as Julia's best friend; it's too similar to pretty much every role she's ever played before from Working Girl to In and Out, and she has virtually no laughs. Laurie Metcalf should be cut entirely in a pointless, laughless role as a town baker. Sela Ward has barely a cameo as does Larry Miller (thank God for small miracles, the man is completely pathetic and unfunny in everything he does). Worst of all is Mrs. Tom Hanks (aka Rita Wilson) playing Gere's ex-wife and editor; why not give the role to someone more deserving and talented? Wasn't Mrs. Spielberg available? Along those same lines, why not Theresa Russell or even Shelley Hack? (Hell, I'd prefer Shelley Long over Mrs. Hanks.)
Again, the movie isn't the worst romantic comedy of the decade. (That would be Till There was You, hands down.) It's just boring as hell. It says something if Richard Gere is the best thing about a romantic comedy.
Incidentally, the audience didn't seem too responsive to the movie either. There were no applause when the movie ended (or even when the inevitable resolution finally came to be), and the temperature in the theater was noticeably FREEZING as if to keep the audience awake. (Cold air was pumped not from the ceiling but from vents in the fucking floor.) I think we were just grateful the thing ended so we could get some coffee to warm up - and wake up.
