The charm of the talented cast keeps this run of the mill Brit-com from turning lame.

Rating: Null/10 (27 September 2004)

Rating: *** (out of *****)
Richard Loncraine's Wimbledon falls into the same trap as Richard Curtis's Love Actually; that is, there are many things to dislike about it. Yet, as a whole, Love Actually left a positive impression on most of the general public when they left the cinema. The question is, will people feel the same way about Wimbledon? Probably, but in this case a little more tolerance of the film's soppier elements is advised. And that might not go down too well with the most cynical of viewers.
So does this mean that Working Title Films have suddenly hit a stumbling block with their last two major Brit-coms? Well, no. Both of them are pleasing enough entertainments. They're just not up to the standards of some of their previous efforts. The happy ending isn't a problem - when you watch their best love films (which include Bridget Jones's Diary and Four Weddings And A Funeral), that's exactly what you want. The central problem is the love story itself. I credit Loncraine for taking the Working Title love formula and trying to apply it to something a little different, i.e. tennis, but in this context it seems abruptly handled as well as a little awkward. It's to the credit of the two talented leads, Kirsten Dunst and Paul Bettany, that this story manages to get off the ground and become a sufficient crowd-pleaser.
The premise sounds just like you would expect it to. British tennis player Peter Colt (Paul Bettany), having fallen to the rank of 119 in the world, has decided that this year's Wimbledon championships will be his last. The turning point arrives when he meets the current rising star and "bad girl" of women's tennis, Lizzie Bradbury (Kirsten Dunst) - and he not only falls in love with her but suddenly finds that he has the potential to win the tournament. Of course, there are obstacles along the way, such as Lizzie's overprotective father (Sam Neill), but surely he'll overcome those.
Yeah, it's pretty run of the mill stuff, with quite a few implausibilities along the way. But Wimbledon isn't as much of a fantasy as you might think. After all, we've seen people like Lizzie and Peter on the court in real life (some have recalled Chris Evert and Jimmy Connors in the 1970's), and overachieving underdogs are coming to the fold more often these days, if not necessarily in tennis. (Remember Greece's victory at Euro 2004?) The tennis aspects of the story are actually handled very well, even if the games are CGI-enhanced. Dunst, Bettany and all the other actors playing tennis stars don't put a foot wrong here. We are further entertained by the presence of former players-turned-commentators, like John McEnroe and Chris Evert.
Unfortunately, just about everyone in the supporting ensemble is wasted. Gifted character actors like Sam Neill and Bernard Hill have little to do as Lizzie and Peter's respective fathers. I think the problem here is the muddled plot, or lack of it - we are constantly rushed from scene to scene, hardly getting a chance to spend time with the players' families. Fortunately, there are still some real scene-stealers to be found, like Jon Favreau's agent.
Enjoy Wimbledon for what it is - a rather thin film, but one that should cheer up its audience with its charm, goodwill, cast and music (although we didn't really need to hear "This Year's Love" yet again, did we?). You may consider it the warm-up exercise for what should be Working Title's real high point this year - the return of Bridget Jones.