Love Actually

After attending its premiere, Emma Thompson thought "Love Actually" was "kind of out there". Hugh Grant said to her," Is this the most psychotic thing we've ever been in?" And explained in later interviews that it was director and screenwriter " Richard Curtis on steroids." Grant added that " When he writes about love, he really means it ". That may be the secret behind the film becoming one of the most unlikely Christmas classics, a status purely created by the viewing audience, which has grown in both size and devotion over the years. I mean, who ever heard of an R-rated Christmas classic? The critics gave it mixed reviews and pointed out many flaws. But what the audience has responded to most is its obvious and authentic goodwill aided by some exceptional acting.

The film is guilty of many of the accusations hurled against it. It's long, it's complicated, it's overstuffed with music, situations, jokes, foul language and an enormous cast whose connections to each other are not always clear on first viewing, with nine love stories. There's married love, unrequited love, the love of friends, first love, stymied love, love at first sight and adolescent fantasy love. There's also infidelity, marital difficulties, gigantic shifts in tone and wildly improbable things happening all the time. The film puts you through a dizzying series of emotions. Though it is essentially light and full of funny moments, it also has scenes that are sad and even tragic, moments that will make you cringe and flawed characters making terrible decisions. In other words, it's a lot like humanity and thus a lot like the holiday season.

Curtis had a long career as one of Britain's top comic sketch and television writers often working with his friend from Oxford, Rowan Atkinson with whom he co-created the Mr. Bean character. He was the primary writer for some of Britain's most successful comedy series and when he began writing for movies, he broke through with "Four Weddings and a Funeral", following that with "Notting Hill"and "Bridget Jones's Diary". This is why he was able to attract this amazing cast of mostly British actors, most of whom had a large international following. One of the complaints of some critics was that such a cast should have been in a big, serious film and were wasted here. That seems like the old Hollywood tendency to ignore comedies at award time. It's this cast that makes the film happen and gives it so much emotional power.

The many involvements of love are tied together by the story of old rock star Billy Mack, wonderfully realized by Bill Nighy, attempting to make a comeback with the Troggs late 60's song. "Love Is All Around" by replacing "Love: with "Christmas". Within minutes of the film's start his release of a string of sailor's expletives tells you this is going to be no ordinary Christmas film. He constantly ruins the usual promotional gigs by speaking his mind about things, driving his manager, Joe (Gregor Fisher), totally crazy. The song's music video is a tribute and funny take on Robert Palmer's "Addicted To Love" and "Simply Irresistible" with their very 80s models. Billy would have probably been at his peak in the 80s but judging from the album covers and posters in his office and Joe's Motorhead T-shirt, he was a hard rocker. When they are not in a scene, their video and rising popularity on television are in the background.

The biggest stars have the most serious story. Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson are a happily married couple with two children. He is the head of a design agency and she's devoted herself to the children. She is also the sister of the new Prime Minister, David (Hugh Grant). Troubles arise for them when Rickman's Harry is tempted by new secretary Mia (German film star Heike Makatsch) who makes an overt play for him, seemingly just for a lark. Thompson's scene accompanied by Joni Mitchell's "Both Sides Now" (in her later, deep, smoky voiced version), is the most devastating moment in the film and one of Thompson's greatest as well.

Hugh Grant famously dancing around 10 Downing Street may have seemed an unlikely Prime Minister, but this was before Boris Johnson. Grant really didn't want to do that scene, thinking it unlikely for a P. M. but it turned out to be one of his most iconic and one still imitated by people all over the world. His search through Wandsworth for staff member Natalie (Martine McCutcheon) is one of the funniest extended scenes in the movie. Colin Firth is a writer who flees to France when his girlfriend is unfaithful, and falls in love with his Portuguese housekeeper, Amelia (Lucia Moniz) though there is a total language barrier between them. This was going to be a film as its own as was Hugh Grant's story and the merging of the two was the genesis of "Love Actually".

Daniel (Liam Neeson) and stepson Sam (Thomas Brodie-Sangster) are left alone after the death of Daniel's wife, and Daniel must try to connect with Sam, who seems to have totally withdrawn to his room. This turns into a romantic story for Sam, and provides one of the two entwined, orchestrated climaxes near the end of the film. I have some trouble with the story, largely because Sangster, though thirteen when he made the film, looks eight or nine to me (I mean, he was still playing a thirteen-year-old convincingly eight years later on "Game of Thrones"). He's a good actor and his seriousness as the character won me over in the end. Here, I also found the conversations between them a bit precocious, but perhaps that's just me. (Pay attention to who David mentions in his wife's eulogy).

A hidden love triangle exists between Juliet (Keira Knightly, Peter (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Mark (Andrew Lincoln). One of the biggest of the establishing scenes is Peter and Juliet's wedding with Mark casually filming the proceedings. It includes a big musical moment that's one of the most totally fun parts of the film. (Look for director Curtis as one of the trombone players). Mark has been secretly in love with Juliet and has acted cold and unwelcoming so as not to complicate matters. This story also created a problem for me because though I believe Curtis intended Mark's actions to be sympathetic with some pathos, they instead make him look somewhat creepy. The front door scene, which is one of the best known,is not exempt from this but that's not what bothers me. If he brings his boombox and tells her to tell Paul "It's just carolers", shouldn't he be playing something that sounds like carolers? "Silent Night" is well sung but it doesn't sound at all like a group of acapella carolers. Maybe Peter is too far away to hear them.

Those are just some of the characters and stories, but I still have to comment on two of the lighter ones. Colin (Kris Marshall) is an unloved redheaded fellow having no luck finding a girl and gets a harebrained idea that if he flies to America, the girls will love his English accent. This develops in such an unreal way that you have to take it as a comic sketch based on adolescent boys' fantasies. It has no reasonable possibility in reality. John (Martin Freeman) and Judy (Joanna Page) are something else, however, as they provide completely unexpected nudity. It only exists to set up a joke, yet more than the infidelity and language in the rest of the film, it is unsuitable for some of the potential audience. First of all, they are stand-ins, not actors, who take the actors' spots and positions so the lighting and cameras can be set up in advance. This takes hours and actors won't do it, but as long as the stand-ins are around the same size and skin tone it works well. But what kind of film is this? It's very unlike the early 2000s and is more like the early 70s, when it seemed every film had to have scenes like this. I finally found an answer in an interview Curtis did. He said as a teenager, he often went to films to see the nude scenes and wanted to include it for that reason. And when was he a teenager? In the early to mid 70's. Its sketch-like nature allows it to be excerpted for some markets and though generally opposed to censorship, I prefer that more people be able to see the film.

In the whole it's no wonder that "Love Actually" has become such a hit with audiences and a Christmas classic in spite of itself. The film is epic in its way, drawing you into so many stories and situations and pulling your emotions this way and that. If you really get into it, it can be an exhausting experience. The Heathrow Airport scenes that open and close the film illustrate that love is, in fact, all around.

What I appreciated most about Love Actually was that for the most part, it realistically looks at relationships happy and sad, successful and unsuccessful, with a future and without. It addresses different forms and levels of love, sometimes straightforward and carefree, sometimes complex and contradictory. There are schmaltzy happy moments and touching sad ones, moments of great strength and moments of foolish weakness. The movie is made up of many threads, and of course some threads are stronger than others.

The most interesting parts of Love Actually are the times when it addresses the tragic situations where love is self-sacrificing, contradictory, or fragile. One character's unrequited love is revealed as a noble sacrifice made for another's happiness (the method of finally achieving closure and moving on, however, could only work in the movies). Another character is shown to be caught between conflicting duties that will, we are led to believe, prevent her from ever being truly happy. And the strength that a third shows when love is shown to be fragile and her world collapses around her is tragically inspiring.

These noble, tragic threads are interwoven with lighthearted comedic ones to produce a fabric that holds together well. While some characters have to fight for their love, others have simple, happy, straightforward relationships, with love (or whatever) falling in their laps like a parcel from Santa Claus. And the purely comic moments, like Rowan Atkinson's appearances and Hugh Grant's Christmas-caroling bodyguard, are delightful in and of themselves.

There are of course plenty of nits to pick. Hugh Grant doesn't make a very believable Prime Minister, and even his very pointed speech to his American counterpart -- especially relevant in light of Bush's recent state visit to England -- don't redeem the odd casting. Others in this forum have commented on the number of fat jokes in the film, and while I agree, I feel I should point out that the entire point of the first such joke is that the character who has fallen for the "fat" girl clearly doesn't think of her as fat, and doesn't understand at first who the other is talking about. It's true that calling her fat is ridiculous; she's only large in comparison to Keira Knightley, who must be carrying some vital organs around in her handbag because there's certainly not enough room in her torso! But that one time would have been enough; the "fat" theme gets tiresome later on in the movie. I also agree with those who have said that much of the nudity is completely unnecessary to the plot, and that at least some of the comedic threads in the movie are formulaic and unoriginal.

In the end, I feel that Love Actually is for the most part a thoughtful and entertaining look at relationships, which does not shy away from taking the bad with the good.

It has been a long time since I have seen a movie so rich in character that I did not want it to end. Love Actually is not a love story, it is a story about love. Love that reinvents itself, multiplies itself, opens itself up, and even devastates.

I am sure the film has its critics who say it drips in buttery corn. But when you are able to retreat inward and let it take you over, it is impossible not to feel. It is a rare treat - a film that makes you feel. During the process I was sad and happy and relieved. I was turned on, turned off, dizzy and grounded.

I was in love one time and it reminded me of that. The power of cinema can be that amazing, it can be that intense. The title of the movie is, perhaps, meant to confuse. Yet I believe it is designed to ask. Love Actually is ... what?

Is it lust? Or a deep appreciation of the past? Can it be conquered by language or political barriers? Race? Infidelity? Age? Can it be all of the above plus more? Maybe a mingling of several?

It is rare for a film of great acting to be married to a terrific script. Yet it is something else for it to speak right to the audience; not talk at them, not try to sell them a film. Let them experience the film. Let it wash over them little by little until there is nothing more of them left.

**** (A)

This movie does come off as a bit shallow, and it contains characters who are one- dimensional caricatures of themselves. But guess what -- this movie is clearly in the romantic, holiday fantasy genre -- just like It's a Wonderful Life and A Christmas Story are. And most people love those movies, so I don't get all the negative reviewing of this film. To me, this movie is clearly a fantasy piece, and as such it should not be subject to all the driveling negativity that would better be directed toward something terrible that masquerades as serious dramatic work. Would the British PM ever go knocking door to door with just one bodyguard? No Way! Do Londoners actually care what song is "number one for Christmas" more than Americans do?? (I'm seriously doubting it -- who other than a few teenagers and record promoters actually cares about charts?) This is clearly a work that's not to be taken as a "serious" movie, though it's seriously fun if you'll take it for the fantasy that it is.

I love this film. Despite the clearly fantastic story lines, I like the characters, and the amazing A-list cast does a great job. I caught it first in theatrical release, then I watched it three times back to back on a plane to London because the other choices were the abysmal "Cheaper by the Dozen" and "Duplex." Since I've caught it on HBO, and I've quickly realized it's one of those movies you can watch repeatedly when flipping channels for a quick "pick me up" that only fantasy movies can provide. My favorite movie of that sort is Groundhog Day, if that clues you into my argument.

The multi-threaded storytelling in this borrows from the likes of Magnolia, and the fact that it's a light hearted holiday theme flick place that device in interesting contrast.

I see Love Actually as a new holiday classic.

This was a lovely script, and I was surprised I hadn't heard much about this movie before I caught it on HBO. I turned it on to keep myself company while working and ended up glued to the screen. I really enjoyed it.

The movie is a series of vignettes about several different people that seemingly have no connection to one another, although by the end the connections are finally all present and accounted for. There's a fair amount of subtle satire and a generous portion of irony; the characters are quite human and often don't do the right thing. I was caught off-guard by the incredibly successful results of the trip to America, but I laughed pretty hard and decided I wouldn't have written the script any other way. Not everyone ends up getting what they want, but then again that's love, er, actually. Nice little film.