More than halfway through the year, we have not seen a single high-profile romantic comedy. Once a reliable staple of the cineplex, the “we know they are destined to be together before they do” movie starring America’s sweethearts like Meg Ryan, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Lopez, and Katherine Heigl seems to be beyond the capabilities of Hollywood at the moment. Even the romantic dramas have underperformed this year, though I liked the sci-fi/fantasy films “Upside/Down,” “Warm Bodies,” and “Beautiful Creatures.”
One problem is that these days it becomes increasingly harder to think of reasons to keep a couple apart, which is one element the supernatural can bring to a story. Coming up later this year, we have two movies that seem drearily familiar. Paula Patten stars in “Baggage Claim,” about a 35-year-old who devotes 30 days to finding a husband which sounds a lot like the awful “What’s Your Number?” “About Time” has Rachel McAdams falling for a time traveler. She must have a sense of deja vu — she did the exact same thing in “The Time Traveler’s Wife.”
I wonder if Rachel McAdams has a sense of deja vu — this feels a lot like “The Time Traveler’s Wife.” And a lot like “Groundhog Day.” But, coming from the guy who wrote “Notting Hill” and “Love Actually,” it just could be wonderful. Coming in November.
Director Terrence Malick has made a movie for those fans who loved “Tree of Life” but thought it was too linear and easy to follow.
“To the Wonder” is an impressionistic story of love and loss. Theoretically it stars Ben Affleck, Rachel McAdams, Javier Bardem, and Olga Kurylenko, but in reality the star is the sun,. It seems to be the focus of almost every exquisitely framed shot, with sunlight flaring always just so through the meticulously arranged tree branches behind the beautiful woman who loves to twirl. This movie has a lot of sunlight and a lot of twirling. Also a lot of what I will call affectionate rough-housing, which I think — can’t be sure about anything here — is the primary, if middle-school-ish, way these characters indicate that they like each other.
It does not have a lot of dialogue, and what conversations we do overhear are almost incidental. The talk we hear is mostly the murmured, diary-like narration of a French single mother who falls in love with an American and brings her daughter to live with him in a barren house in a barren landscape that is in sharp contrast with the “wonder” of the rich environment she left behind. Malick seems to have a devilish pleasure in withholding information. The daughter, Tatiana, is the only character whose name we are allowed to know.
It is maddeningly opaque at times but undeniably lyrical. It does not just break free from narrative; it explodes it into an almost-pointillist kaleidoscope of images, whispers, and detours. Where “Tree of Life” had a dinosaur, “To the Wonder” has a zig into an underwater scene with sea turtles before it zags into a separate segment (I can’t say story) about a sad priest (Bardem).
If is more tone poem than movie, it is an intriguing one, touching on themes of connection and disconnection, love and betrayal, at the level of society and individuals. At times it is annoyingly opaque, but there are also moments of stunning beauty. If he continues down this road, Malick’s next movie will be delivered to the theater in individual frames, to be tossed toward the screen in random order, and many of them will feature sun flares. But I’ll still go to see it.
Parents should know that this movie includes sexual references and situations, briefly explicit, including adultery, nudity, smoking, and drinking.
Family discussion: Why is the story told through narration instead of dialogue? How does the issue of contamination of the soil and water relate to the story? Why is the house unfurnished?
If you like this, try: “Tree of Life”
Parents should know that this movie includes some nudity and explicit sexual situations, including adultery. Characters drink alcohol.
Rated PG-13 for an accident scene, sexual content, partial nudity, and some language
Profanity:
A few s-words
Alcohol/ Drugs:
Drinking
Violence/ Scariness:
Car crash with injuries
Diversity Issues:
None
Date Released to Theaters:
February 10, 2012
Date Released to DVD:
May 8, 2012
Amazon.com ASIN:
B005LAIGSM
More than any other attribute, memory is what defines our identity and our connections to each other. When a young woman’s traumatic brain injury erases her memory not just of having married her husband but even of having met him, both of them face daunting challenges about who they are and what they can be to each other.
The first time was so easy. Leo (Channing Tatum) sees Paige (Rachel McAdams), a free-spirited art student, and they are immediately drawn to each other. It was just two weeks later, we will learn, when she first said, almost to herself, that she loved him. They had a quirky-cute wedding at the Chicago Art Institute (near the Seurat painting Ferris Bueller visited on his day off) with their quirky-cute friends and their vows written on the menus of their favorite little coffee shop (Cafe Mnemonic, a bit of memory foreshadowing). They love, love, love each other until their car is hit by a snow plow and she goes through the windshield. When she wakes up from a chemically-induced coma, she thinks Leo is a doctor. She has no memory of him or of the past five years. She thinks she is still in law school and engaged to Jeremy (Scott Speedman). She can’t figure out why her hair is so unstyled or how she got a tattoo. Leo has to try to make her fall in love with him all over again, and this time it will take much longer.
It is inspired by the true story of Kim and Krickett Carpenter, who wrote a book about about their experience but the marketing is intended to tie it to the stars’ previous appearances in Nicholas Sparks movies. It does have Sparks-ian themes of love and loss and it has a gooey layer of Hollywood candy topping, but it is a bit sharper and less sudsy than Sparks movies like “The Notebook” and “Dear John.” Leo and Paige and their friends all so quirky-cute they might be Shields and Yarnell performing in “Godspell.” The further it departs from the real story, jettisoning the importance of the couple’s faith and some of messiness of her recovery and throwing in a tired twist with Paige’s wealthy, uptight, controlling family, the further it gets from what does work in the movie, the palpable tenderness and devotion of Leo and the wrenching challenge of trying to reconnect with Paige as her uncertainty about who she is makes her retreat. The great philosophy professor Stanley Cavell has written about the enduring appeal of the “comedies of remarriage,” movies that are not about falling in love but about re-falling. There is something very captivating about the idea of someone who knows us and is willing to fall in love with us anyway.
Parents should know that this movie includes brief language (s-word), sexual references, adultery and male rear nudity, one punch, alcohol, and a car accident with injuries.
Family discussion: Why was Paige afraid to remember her life with Leo? What does “I wanted to earn it” mean? What does the name of the place Leo and Paige went to eat mean?
We love those disheveled but indomitable women of the television world, from Holly Hunter in “Broadcast News” to Mary Tyler Moore in her iconic 1970’s television series, Tina Fey in “30 Rock,” and Michelle Pfeiffer in the under-appreciated “I Could Never Be Your Woman.” Part Hermione Granger, part Cinderella, these are the girls whose hands were always raised in class turned women who inspire us with their determination, smarts, and skill. As Joan Cusack’s character says to Hunter’s, “Except for socially, you’re my role model.” On the outside, they may appear frazzled in a just-take-off-the-glasses-and-comb-the-hair-and-she’s-a-knockout mode. On the inside, they are super-capable, super-talented, and super-lonely. Hunter’s character scheduled crying time for herself each morning before spending the rest of the day keeping everyone on track and ahead of the competition.
And now there’s Becky (Rachel McAdams), dedicated, ambitious, addicted to her Blackberry — and about to be let go. When she’s called into a meeting with the boss, her colleagues are so sure it’s about a big promotion they have congratulatory t-shirts made. On the contrary. They love her, but in these days of tight budgets, they have other priorities. Becky’s mom (Patti D’Arbanville) is not encouraging. But Becky does not give up and soon she finds herself producing a network morning show (the good news) that is so awful half its viewers are “people who’ve lost their remotes” (the bad news). They cover stories like “Eight things you didn’t know you could do with potatoes” and chirpy interviews with celebrities.
Becky doesn’t get a very warm welcome. Co-host Colleen Peck (Diane Keaton) greets her with “Enjoy the pain, Gidget.” The security guard tells her not to unpack. She has no budget. But she has an idea — the station has a contract with a legendary newsman named Mike Pomeroy (Harrison Ford playing a character somewhere between Walter Cronkite and Wolf Blitzer) who is currently being paid but not doing anything. She coerces him into sharing hosting duties with Colleen, and starts to shake things up.
Director Roger Michell shows the same gift for endearing light romance that he did in “Notting Hill.” Once again he has some sly, understated pokes at the media and some surprising cameos and clever lines. Ford and Keaton are pros who make their characters real and interesting and very funny. Patrick Wilson makes a sympathetic Prince Charming. But in every way the heart of the story is McAdams, who is a wonder, lit from within and utterly captivating.
.