Could have been so much better and is flawed in so many ways but it just about works as a sweet `date' movie but no more than that

Rating: Null/10 (18 April 2004)

It's a matter of weeks until Christmas in London and despite the claims by Billy Mack's song that `Christmas is all around' really it is love that seems to be everywhere. Some of it is flirting, some of it is infatuation, some of it is lust, some of it is loss, some of it is dedication, some of it is failing, some of it is adulterous, some of it is longing and some of it is unrequited. In a thinly connected collection of lives, we see men and women involved in all the various types of love as the festive season approaches.
Despite the hype and critical fawning over this film, I didn't bother going to the cinema to see this film as love, actually, pretty much sucked at that moment in my life! Things hadn't really changed when I got round to seeing it on DVD but I didn't feel that I could allow myself to miss the `best British film ever' for any more time. The film starts with one of the most morally abhorrent openings I have seen in quite some time - I put it right up there with Doberman for having the opening that made me think about stopping the film a matter of seconds into the movie. Curtis is a successful writer, but using the memory of the murdered families of 9/11 and cashing in on their dying sentiments is tasteless in the extreme and I was shocked that he had done it. Despite this, I stuck with the film (hell - I'd paid for it!) and was glad to find that he didn't misfire this badly again. However the film is not as good as the hype would suggest it to be although it is amusing enough to watch once and to keep you involved.
The film does well to just about keep control of so many different strands and special mention should probably go to the editors for keeping it together. However, this does not meant that the plot is any good - just that it hangs together well despite the difficulties it presented. It is not that good; the majority of the strands are underdeveloped and very superficial. The `love' and relationships here do not engage and never really seem real - only the marriage damaged by flirting struck me as being a good shot at reality for many people. The rest of the relationship are the ones you get in film - where it doesn't matter if they are based on physical attraction (like Jamie's cleaner), or on flirting or the thinnest of reasons because all that matters is that they are sweet and romantic for the duration of the film. In this regard it manages to be just about amusing enough without ever really being funny and enjoyable without ever really being charming. I doubt that, for me, it would hold up to repeat viewings though - the substance is just too lacking for that.
What surprised me about the film most was just how very focused the characters were in terms of relationships. With so many different characters I was surprised that each and every relationship was a) straight and b) white. OK - Juliet's husband was black, but he was not the romantic focus of her strand. This is not a claim of racism or anything so stupid, I was just surprised that Curtis didn't at least try to write in an `alternative' relationship to what is admittedly the `norm'. This didn't spoil the film for me but I would have liked to see such an ensemble piece include a spread of relationships (without just making it a token thing).
The cast is stellar and it is just as well as their `familiarity' helps to cover the fact that the script doesn't really help us to get to know any of the characters. Nighy has a good time in his role and his `love' would actually have been the sweetest and most touching one of the film had it not been handled as a joke. Firth is charming but his character is paper-thin - we see no emotion from him considering the situation at the start and his `love' is out of nothing. Grant is OK in the most comic of the relationships but his dance is the worst scene in the film and the `anti-American' bit just seems to come out of nowhere and go nowhere. Neeson is good, but again I never felt his loss as a real thing. Rickman and Thompson's thread is the strongest of the film and the only problem I had with them was that the film had a scene with Rickman talking about `Karl' and I couldn't stop laughing! The remainder are mixed - Linney's relationship is interesting but not expanded on, while Freeman's stuff could easily have been lost. Special mention from me for Sosanya - she has little to do here but she is a very good actress who still does stage work (and also happens to be gorgeous!). The star cameos are OK - they don't add a great deal but they don't detract either - all seem to be beautiful women so I can't complain for the inclusion of Richards, Cuthbert and Schiffer. However add Wes Butters, Jo Wiley, Atkinson (pointless), Ant & Dec (funny - `Ant or Dec'!), Thornton, Parkinson and so many others and you begin to wonder why the film had to cram in so many. To be honest with you I truly believe that this film could have been so much more touching, romantic and involving if it had lost half of these stories and just developed the remaining ones to be realer and more involving.
Overall this isn't a very good film but it is so damn `busy' that it manages to make you miss the fact that it could have been so much better than it was. The sheer amount of stuff going on means that very few of the relationship get beyond the superficial level of unrealistic romance, plus the fact that too few of the relationship bare any relation to reality (especially as more and more gorgeous cameos are wheeled out). It may not be funny or charming but it does just enough so that it leaves you with a sweet feeling. I quite liked it but found it hard to overlook these weaknesses - why it was so highly regarded by critics is quite beyond me but if you're after a typically romantic comedy that gives you a warm feeling with no sense of reality then this will probably do you.