In "Alex & Emma" Alex, a writer, Alex (Wilson), spends most of the run dictating a romance novel to his stenographer, Emma (Hudson), in his Boston apartment. As the novel develops, Emma becomes more involved in the process and, of course, in Alex. Periodically the film cuts away to vignettes in the world of the novel with Wilson and Hudson playing the lead characters. As a result we get to watch the couple slowly gravitate toward one another with predictable results. Overall the film is watchable though not memorable, eminently predictable, and relies heavily on Wilson and Hudson. Production value is par, the chemistry is just so-so, the ending is clever and twisty, and the sum of the parts is something which will be most enjoyed by sentimental romcom junkies. (C+)
Add a Review
-
=G=24 December 2003
-
fambouma26 November 2005I've seen the movie yesterday, on DVD. I had read most comments after buying, but I do not regret. I found the beginning rather slow and not very much to laugh about. But when Emma is going to work for Alex, there is a plot. The way the film has been made, by showing the real story (writing a book) mixed with played scenes from the book (the characters come alive), I liked very much. Well cut, fast, telling, and never a dull moment. Not a magnificent film, but quite entertaining. I think if the parts had been played by famous actors, like Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan, the appreciation would have been higher. But Kate and Luke have enough appeal to be attractive to look at and to be convincing.
-
ScottDMenzel8 July 2003I was actually looking forward to going to see Alex and Emma. I think Kate Hudson is a terrific actress and Luke Wilson is a good actor as long as he plays the right role. Sadly these two could not hold this movie together.
The movie's whole plot is really ridiculous. Luke Wilson's character Alex is supposed to finish writing his second novel in a month in order to pay off the mob. So Kate Hudson's character (Emma) works with Alex to help him write the book as he recites it. Well after that the movie starts getting rather slow and drags on. The only thing that makes this movie any fun is the arguments between Alex and Emma about how the scene in the book should be written. This makes most of the movie enjoyable. Another thing I enjoyed was Kate Hudson playing many different roles. They were amusing. Other than that, this film was very dull and forgettable. It's a shame because this movie, I think, had a lot of potential but the writing on this baby was pretty bad. The movie also has a very unoriginal ending which I am sure anyone without seeing the movie can guess. I really wonder why writers cannot create a different and unique ending for romantic movies.
Alex and Emma is not worth the night showing at the theater but it is worth a matinee or Video rental. I would have to give Alex and Emma a 6/10. -
MovieAddict201614 November 2003I will admit that I went into "Alex & Emma" with great hesitation, but came out with a renewed feeling of surprisement. Here's a film that got bad word of mouth from press screenings and essentially flopped -- but I enjoyed it. It's not as clever a contrast between the sexes as "When Harry Met Sally...," and it's not quite as fun as "Sleepless in Seattle." But, for all it's worth, I consider one of the better romantic comedies of 2003.
Luke Wilson is Alex, a genius writer living in a crusty apartment in Manhattan. He has thirty days to write a full-length work of fiction and turn it into his publisher for over one hundred grand, otherwise the Cuban Mafia is going to hunt him down and kill him. Why? He owes them 100,000 dollars of his income.
Kate Hudson is Emma, a stenographer hired by Alex to transcribe his words onto paper, since his laptop was smashed up by the Cubans. She begins the job with hesitation and offers helpful advice from a reader's perspective throughout the process.
Meanwhile, we get a story-within-a-story when the film moves from Alex's world to Adam's, the subject of Alex's novel. Adam (Wilson) is heading to the fictional island of St. Charles, located near Maine. I missed why he was coming in the first place because I have a short attention span, but it had something to do with collecting a payment.
When he arrives, he meets a beautiful French woman (Sophie Marceau) and the man who wants to marry her (David Paymer). The only problem is that he finds himself falling for her, too. And the woman's servant, Ylsa, or Illsa, or...I forget, they kept changing her name, from Swedish to German to Latino to American. I don't remember who she finally turned out to be. Let's just say Ylsa ("spelled the way it sounds," Alex says), also played by Kate Hudson.
Life parallels fiction. Of course, I guessed the "surprise" twist of it all about a mile away. But that didn't matter, because this is a pretty funny movie. There are some great one-liners and little gags, especially for writers. It spoofs the process of it all. Of course, if you view the movie with a critical eye you'll find many flaws. (Roger Ebert pointed out that Alex, when dictating, never seems to pause to find words and never messes up sentences, but hey...it's a movie, how interesting would it be if he just kept starting his sentences over and over?)
But some of the jokes are very funny. For example, during his writing process, Emma interrupts to tell Alex that the name "Ylsa" is not spelled the way it sounds. He says it is. She says it would be, "Ilsa." He disagrees. So in his book, he makes the character Adam ask how it is spelled, and he has Ylsa, respond, "Y-l-s-a, spelled just how it sounds."
Rob Reiner takes a small role as Alex's publisher. When writing out his check to Alex he says, "Now, is it made out to Cuban Mafia or The Cuban Mafia?" I love this stuff. Reiner has directed some great films in his past ("This is Spinal Tap," "The Princess Bride," "When Harry Met Sally," "A Few Good Men," am I missing any?). He has directed another winner.
I really don't understand this film's negative reviews. Okay, so it isn't the most original film to come along in years, but what film is?Compared to so many other "romantic comedies," this one made me laugh. A lot more than I thought I would. After starting to grow weary of Luke Wilson after seeing his smug role in "Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde," I was surprised by his turn here. He's getting back to his roots. Kate Hudson (daughter of Goldie Hawn) has yet to really surprise me in any way, but she's not too bad.
When I occasionally enjoy a movie that got bad reviews, I can usually see why the movie got them. Here, on the other hand, I can not really see what the problem is. It's got a simple premise, a cute story, engaging leads, and an interesting story with more than a handful of laughs. I laughed less at last year's "The Hot Chick" and that was considered a comedy. So is this a bad movie? No, I don't think so. Not at all. But, apparently, many people do. It's too bad.
Note: There's a direct reference to "When Harry Met Sally..." in this film. Emma says she always turns to the last page of a book before she reads it. If you recall, Billy Crystal said the same thing one time back in 1989.
3/4 stars -
John Ulmer -
I'm worried about you movie fans. If you're reading this review, you might be thinking about watching 'Alex & Emma'. If you saw it already, all hope is lost. For those who haven't seen this unromantic and unfunny rom-com yet, here are a dozen helpful hints. Yes, I've just created the exclusive Alex & Emma 12 Step Program. This is critical, so take notes!
You can...
1. set every clock in your house to the plot developments
2. gulp a shot of whiskey every time you laugh (WARNING: you won't even catch a buzz)
3. wonder what the heck happened to that talented Rob Reiner fellow
4. yell at Hudson to "just shut your annoying trap and type, dummy"
5. imagine Luke's brother Owen playing Alex because that's what Luke did
6. set your eyebrows on fire to keep yourself awake
7. make your stuffed animals kiss each other (they'll probably teach you more about passion than Alex or Emma)
8. breathe a sigh of relief because no one will actually publish the lame novel the characters co-write
9. check Hudson's IMDb page to confirm if she has indeed played this same character 287 times already (yup)
10. start writing a snarky review halfway through the movie
11. return the DVD to the video store, rent something else, and never think of spending 96 minutes with 'Alex & Emma' again
12. repeat 12 step process as necessary -
Despite what I've read review wise on this site, I got this movie because I enjoy Kate and Luke and thought that together they may make a great team. An unconventional love story that makes sense, the move from reality to fiction is smooth and sweet. Luke's funny, crazy, a bit charming and sweet as Alex, a writer who has to write his next book in 30 days or be killed by Loan Sharks. He hires Emma (Kate Hudson) a sweet, opinionated and odd character, so he can narrate and she can type. Things get strange from there as Alex narrates and envisions them as the characters, but it's charming none the less. I giggled and enjoyed the scenes and I thought it was a very cute film that people have read to much into. Meant to be a sweet and enjoyable film, it's not meant to be the next Gone With the Wind. Charming and cute none the less with Rob Reiner behind the camera. Worth 7 stars for it's cute effort.
-
While it is not mentioned much, this film is an obvious remake/rethink of the Holden/Hepburn comedy "Paris When It Sizzles." This is a case of the remake being better than the original. Audrey Hepburn was always charming, but "Paris" is some of her worst, most posy, artificial acting work.
The strength of the re-write is the re-writes of "the book" (film within the film) that give Hudson the chance to to big slapstick characters. Far from deserving praise as a great actress that she got for this role, these characters were as deep as the wigs, costumes, and huge caricatures, but she was FUN. It was like going to see your friend's daughter in her highschool play. 100 actresses could have done it just as well, but she got the part, and at least she is game to take some chances.
Wilson is her straight man, and is always convincing in being the messy guy who falls for the girl even though he doesn't know it. Like "Paris" this film relys mainly on the leading lady's charms. Hudson is adequate.
It could have been funnier and more original with more inventive casting. It would have been wonderful to see someone like the hilarious Jennifer Coolidge, or the brilliant chameleon Catherine O'Hara in this role, THAT would be ten stars. This ain't. -
tabuno25 January 201924 June 2003. This fun, entertaining romance comedy adds special fantasy scenarios and uses cute past historical romance with current day playwriting uses characters past and present. The twist towards the ending makes for a memorable dilemma. The premise and the script unfortunately were underplayed and the climax tame compared to its potential, but Luke Wilson and Kate Hudson make for a fun relationship with some great humor and entertaining date romp at the theaters. This is a decent, worthwhile movie, even though it could have played it for even greater drama and laughs. Seven out of ten stars.
-
legentillucide28 September 2009Hi,
None of the «professional» film critics, as far as I've read or known, has bothered to mention that «Alex & Emma», quite before being a kind of remake of «Paris when it sizzles» (1964) -- starring William Holden & Audrey Hepburn --, it is first of all an «adaptation» -- not to say a remake -- of a great film French movie, «La Fête à Henriette» (1952), by Julien Duvivier, starring Dany Robin & Michel Auclair (not «Eauclaire, as many mistakingly called him !).
PS: Perhaps a trivial remark, when who has noticed how many stars' billing rank or order may change within a few years -- in the «stock-exchange» up and downs of crowds favourites of the cinema ?
This is a sort of «extreme» example -- time-wise -- since 10 years went by between «Sabrina» (1954) -- in which Miss Hepburn was billed BEFORE Mr. Holden, and «Paris when it sizzles» when this billing order WAS REVERSED !
What a shame that Spencer Tracy and Humphrey Bogart didn't ever appear together in a movie ! This was due to the fact that both great stars wanted to have first billing in William Wyler's «The Desperate Hours» (1955)... and neither would give in !
Who said that «Vanity or vanities, all's but vanity» ? -
soundwall27 February 2005Just want to voice my support for this movie. It doesn't deserve such a low score as it is.
This is much better than I expected. As a matter of fact, some part of me was moved by it. Alex & Emma isn't a great movie, and it's not a masterpiece either, but it's a well produced film nevertheless. Both Luke(who excels at this kind of role) and Kate delivered it well above just being competent. A simple yet warm plot that works, plus a decent directing.
Sometimes we need to be reminded of the simple touch and warmth between us, just to get us going in the walk of life. -
Krog__20 August 2004What a waste of an interesting comedy. Could've been wonderful, seriously, it could've been, but...
Anyway, I've grown tired of this recent trend that romantic comedies can't be either romantic or a comedy. Well, I guess it's not a recent trend, but there's a huge problem with it. This movie was neither funny nor tear-jerking nor anything of importance. Which is really sad, considering its director.
The "plot" is that a writer has a limited time to write a book and so he dictates it to a hired secretary. Two romances are going on; one in the book world and one in the real world. Neither are romantic. A waste, a crying shame, whatever you want to call it, DON'T see this movie. Go watch Love, Actually or another good rom-com. Let this burn in the depths of Hollywood Hell. -
dtb21 January 2004Rob Reiner's return to the romantic comedy genre starts out pleasant but unremarkable -- that is, until the Central Casting Cuban loan sharks leave (though it's funny when they appear in the novel-within-the-movie as shady flamenco dancers) and wastrel writer Alex Sheldon (any relation to Paul Sheldon in Reiner's earlier adaptation of MISERY? Hmm... :-) starts dictating his novel to smart, opinionated stenographer Emma Dinsmore. That's when ALEX & EMMA springs to life like a goofy cross between ADAPTATION and PARIS WHEN IT SIZZLES. Luke Wilson is likable enough as Alex, but I must admit I think his brother Owen Wilson would've brought more verve and magnetism to the role. (Man, Owen Wilson and Kate Hudson together on the big screen -- I'd pay full admission price for that! But I digress... :-) As Emma, our household fave Kate Hudson plays a slightly starchier brunette version of her usual endearing self. In particular, she seems to be having great fun playing not only Emma, but also several variations of the same constantly-revamped au pair/cook/all-purpose domestic in Alex's novel-in-progress as it's enacted onscreen. I liked Emma as soon as I realized she and I share a certain quirk: we both like to read the end of books before buying them (albeit for slightly different reasons: Emma feels if the ending isn't good, it's a waste of time to read the book, whereas I like to see how the rest of the book happened to lead up to that particular ending. But I'm digressing again -- this movie had that effect on me; make of that what you will! :-)! I think writers would appreciate ALEX AND EMMA more than most moviegoers, if only because it does a pretty good job of getting into a writer's head, and the gags involving the novel-within-the-film are funny and inventive. Interestingly, ALEX & EMMA is very loosely based on Dostoyevsky's relationship with his stenographer, who he wed in real life. In fact, the movie's original title, LOOSELY BASED ON A TRUE LOVE STORY, would also have fit the novel-within-the-film, which turns out to have more parallels with Alex's real-life experiences than he'd previously admitted. (THOSE SWEET WORDS would've been a good title as well, especially since that's also the name of the Norah Jones song over the end credits.) Anyway, ALEX & EMMA would be a nice "date movie" for writers and the people who love them; now that it's available on home video, why not rent it for a snuggly movie-watching evening at home? :-)
-
mashcity22 June 2003This was a sweet little movie, a bit too long, but nice. Not all movies are great, or loaded with action, this one is fun. The movie brings up one very good point-do we really know what we want & are we strong enough to go after it?
-
tltpanic9 July 2003There is no chemistry between Hudson and Wilson. The story drags...and drags. The use of so many different characters does not have the desired effect (whatever that may have been), this gimmick only makes the movie more tiresome. My friend and left long before the end, and that was the only part of the experience I do not regret.
-
Alex and Emma (2003) Luke Wilson, Kate Hudson, Sophie Marceau, David Paymer, Alexander Wauthier, Leili Kramer, Rob Reiner, Rip Taylor, Cloris Leachman, D: Rob Reiner. Disappointingly lightweight WHEN HARRY MET SALLY-ish romantic comedy, especially with Reiner's stroke of novelty and use of charm, has Hudson in five roles with not all of them genuine. Deceitful hypochondriac (Wilson) who writes books for a living gets himself in a jam when he has to make a $100 grand for a pair of Cuban Mafia loan sharks in thirty days by writing another work of fiction so he doesn't wind up six feet under. So he hires an opinionated stenographer (Hudson) to help him sculpt a love triangle on paper that then percolates into a real-life romance budding between the two. Though both stories soon come together, the trouble with the film is that it flips pages back and forth from its outside story set in contemporary Boston to a New England island set in the 1920s for its story within a story, which is rich in tedium. A line spoken from Hudson about Wilson's fictional triangle is exactly like the film itself; the story shoves itself into a corner, where it has nowhere to go except a typically old-fashioned and too quickly enfolded finale. What redeems the film is its endearing leads and airy sense of romance, and occasionally a witty one-liner. Running Time: 96 minutes and rated PG-13 for language and sexual content. **
-
Mr_Sensitive6 February 2005Another romantic comedy from K. Hudson that you actually not care about; after all her last movie (How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days) sucks badly. But this movie is actually not that bad and is actually have more senses and have pretty good story line.
The movie went great until almost at the end of the movie when it adapted most of the typical romantic movie storyline (i.e. when couple fight and makeup later).
Anyway the movie might make it for the romantic movie lover, for then I think it would be boring for everyone else since the movie is quite slow.
Recommendation: Worth One Watch (so rent it) Rating: 5.5/10 (Grade: C) -
This satisfying romantic bonbon is a more substantial comedy than you might think. Luke Wilson plays novelist Alex who hires stenographer Emma (Kate Hudson) so he can make his deadline (emphasis on the "dead"), and along the way shows life imitating art imitating life imitating art...you get the idea.
But even if you know where the movie is going, you'll enjoy the journey. Droll Luke and vivacious Kate make great banter and ham it up with style. And you want to invite Rob Reiner over for dinner after the movie, as usual.
Now, they say you should write about what you know, which is why so many movie leads are anguished writers. In this case, the way Alex writes both reveals and mocks the creative process and authors in general. For instance, the title of Alex's earlier novel makes an allusion to a much more famous romance novel (and movie) set in Cambridge, Massachusetts. So there's some wit in the screenplay that makes the movie more than just a cheap chick-flick. -
Love S20 June 2004The idea for the story is a good one for a romantic comedy. So after I ready the tagline and basic summary I thought to myself 'This could be really good and cute'. Boy where I mistaken. This is the worst romantic comedy I've ever seen, it should've gotten some kind of award for being so bad. The whole movie (not kidding here) focuses on developing the fictional characters in Alex's book instead of the real ones Ales (Luke Wilson) and Emma (Kate Hudson). For the first 5 minutes it seems like fun, but after 20 you just realize that you no longer care about the real main characters because they're so underdeveloped. Also it's ridiculous and insulting to the audience to have Alex and Emma fall in love in this mad and stormy way from just sitting in his apartment working 24/7 almost completely without actually talking to each other. When most of the movie was done, it became clear that they'd wasted a really good story setting this way. It's kind of ironic, because the book that Alex is writing in the movie obviously suck in the same way. This is by the way another mistake in the movie. The script is so bad, that everything Alex tells us (the audience) about the book he's writing throughout the movie makes it seem like a real piece of crap. The ending is really good (for a romantic film that is), and it's too bad they didn't tried harder when they made the movie.
-
drriley3 July 2003This is a cerebral movie, OK? Don't expect loud noises and lots of action. It's a sweet love story, gentle and thoughtful. It felt good to watch. I'll see it again and I'll buy it when it's available. I can't say that for much that comes out these days. Kate Hudson is truly delightful.
-
insaneo26 June 2003I cannot believe I wasted my money on this garbage? While watching this, I asked myself "Why would ANYONE, especially Kate Hudson and Luke Wilson, want to make such a crappy movie like this?!" My goodness, what happened to Kate Hudson after Almost Famous? It was bad acting, bad directing, a cheesy script and a lack of chemistry that made this movie a giant stinker. I didn't laugh at all, and the plot made no sense. I suggest you save your money, or go watch something like "Whale Rider" or "Finding Nemo". 1/10 stars
-
JohnHowardReid20 June 2015I enjoyed this movie. I agree with many reviewers that it has faults. It's none too believable for instance, but what movie is? The problem is that this movie's make-believe world is just too obvious. Deliberately so! That factor didn't worry me. Nor did the ridiculous depiction of the writer himself until the very end when his agent hands him $100,000. Now this is really fairy-tale land! I can put up with a writer who is blank one moment, word-perfect the next, but no agent ever handed any writer an advance of even $10, let alone $100,000! Agents don't give their clients advances. On rare occasions in the past, a publisher might he induced by the author's agent to hand a really consistently bestselling author an advance of $10,000 – from which the agent will subtract at least 10% and maybe even 15% or 20% – but those days are gone with the wind, alas! All the same, despite its faults, this movie is still worth seeing, if only for Kate Hudson who excels here in not one but FIVE roles! Available on an excellent Warner Brothers DVD.
-
I should have walked out like several other people did. Why, oh why, did I sit through the whole thing? I truly expected better role choices from these two main actors. There didn't seem to be any believable connection between Wilson and Hudson either. Don't even bother with this one as a rental.
-
ed_lois24 November 2005My family and I saw this movie when it first came out and wanted more of Hudson and Wilson. The never ending interaction between these two was fun. We never knew what would happen next to his "new book". I thought it was fun to see and hear how a writer puts to words any story and Luke Wilson amazed us with his quick dictation. I thought it was funny when Emma keeps interrupting to put her two cents in, especially when she has no skill at telling a story. We were so glad to see Rob Reiner directing such a great movie again. This is definitely worth watching. We want more Mr.Reiner,please. We rank it up there with Princess Bride.
-
I go to a romantic comedy to see the tension between two people and the suspense of the plot. Well, there was little of both. I felt like the screenwriters didn't want to write a movie, but it was time to make money on past accomplishments (Rob Reiner). The story contained too many characters. I didn't think the different foreign characters of Emma was needed. The plot should have been stronger than to use that bad trick. The Cuban loan sharks were insulting and dumb. I got tired of Alex's apartment. The one scene that should have played the best was when the couple spent the day not working and decided to go into the city. Opportunity missed! At the end of that day, they should have had there first kiss. Hello! When the two finally got together later in the film it was anti-climatic. Maybe I am crazy, but Alex could of seemed a little more happy when he looked at Emma. Kate Hudson is beautiful. What a smile! If you are looking for a better romantic comedy with the same premise check out "My Dear Secretary (1948)." Rob Reiner if you ever get to read this, I waited a month to see this movie and was very disappointed.
-
weirdodan26 June 2003A good movie is a magical thing. When watching a well-constructed film, an audience should be enveloped by it. Yes, suspense should be felt and happiness shared, but more than that; the person watching should feel as if he or she is a part of the film. The movie, in fact, should no longer appear as a movie at all, but an adventure experienced amid an otherwise banal existence. I recall the stories of most movies not as such, but as memories as clear as my first kiss. To this day I still remember the first tooth I lost, the first man-eating shark I blew up, and the multiple love affairs I've had with Ingrid Bergman. And, yes Mr. Reiner, I recall meeting, on several occasions, Sally, rescuing a certain princess bride, and the brief period I spent as the drummer for Spinal Tap.
`Alex & Emma', however, which I saw only a few hours ago, is already less than a fleeting hint of boredom in my mind. I was not enveloped. Through a coincidence quite unfortunate to all involved, including myself, badly directed weak performances of a poor script were edited faultily. In other words, there was very little to like about this movie. True, this was all said weeks ago by highly respected film-critics, but I too thought to myself, `but how could I pass up Rob Reiner's new romantic comedy?' After all, he did bring us `When Harry Met Sally'. Ah, but such thinking was my downfall and I beg you to prevent it from being yours; had Mr. Rob not included himself in the movie, I would have assumed he had died and the studio had had someone else direct this insult to my eyes. Perhaps Raja Gosnell. A very drunk Raja Gosnell. A very drunk Raja Gosnell attempting to ruin his career. In fact, no, `Never Been Kissed,' Mr. Gosnell's first romantic comedy and second film was ten times the film this was.
In conclusion, don't see `Alex & Emma.' If not to save yourself the time and money, and avoid what would undoubtedly be an unsuccessful date, shun this film in an attempt to, in your own mind, cherish the concept of love as something ever-so romantic and always free from cliché and relish the image of Rob Reiner as a director who could do no wrong. Because believe me, he can.