Skip to main content

Not Much Ado about Anyone But You


Intense chemistry is a great thing for a rom-com; arguably the most important thing. But it is not the only thing. And even with a recent dearth of mainstream-platformed entries in the genre, it’s not enough for a movie to get by. For Anyone but You it was a solid pitch though: a pairing of two of the hottest would-be movie stars of their generation in that classic of all romantic-comedy formats, a modern take on Shakespeare -specifically Much Ado About Nothing. And director Will Gluck has had experience in a similar vein, having previously helmed a modern take on The Scarlet Letter, Easy A, about a decade ago.
But Easy A was set in high school, as has been the most successful domain for modern interpretations of Shakespeare -and there’s reason for that. The high stakes and melodrama of a lot of Shakespeare plays translate to the contemporary world better in that stratified pubescent environment. Whereas the immediate misunderstanding and sharp-witted coldness of the romantic pair at the centre of this movie, two functioning adults, comes off more bewildering, no matter how cool they might make it look.
Sydney Sweeney and Glen Powell star as Bea and Ben (get it!), who hit it off really well on a first date that just happens to end in a dumb misunderstanding which quickly turns into a rapport of the two exchanging snarky insults when they meet to attend the Sydney wedding of Bea’s sister Halle (Hadley Robinson) and Ben’s friend Claudia (Alexandra Shipp).
The similar naming conventions are cute, but the Shakespeare allusions, particularly the various schemes of matchmaking, become increasingly laboured as the film goes along, especially considering the script plays fast and loose with the actual plot of the play. Gone is much of the story around the two leads, the machinations of a Don Jon type or the cruel misunderstanding between the engaged lovers. And while it’ll include a scene where Pete (GaTa) and Roger (Bryan Brown) manipulate a listening Ben into thinking Bea is in love with him, it’ll add its own storyline accompanying this (more out of a modern rom-com) of the two getting wise to this and playing along as a way to advance different goals of their own. It both seems to want the credit of its influence, bookending the film with quotes from the play, yet also seems a little embarrassed by it -as though it knows just how hackneyed it is.
Regardless of its source this is a formula rom-com with many of the same kind of feckless jokes seen in dozens of others. No character other than the two leads is fitted with any dimension beyond the strict role they are there to serve. It is a highly calculated movie, every beat and action has a rigidity to it, even spare moments of nudity -dropped for irreverent little shocks, are dull and empty. Attempts at cynicism in the dialogue falls flat, as the script tries to pass off the coolness of its stars as the personality of the movie itself. And on the subject of that dialogue, it is so bland in the ways it tries to be smart. Most of the insults Ben and Bea trade have none of the wit of their theatrical analogues, often they’re just forced and come at such inopportune times. It’s another casualty of this setting for a Shakespeare story, as so often these two just look obnoxious and petty rather than sharp or sophisticated.
But the writing is of little hindrance where the chemistry, and just the general performance charisma of these two actors, who in any other decade would be household names, is concerned. Powell and Sweeney are firecrackers together, at all times completely in step and at the exact right pitch to elevate each other’s choices and comic timing. It’s a fun and very natural dynamic that at times really supersedes the poorness in quality they’re working with. They also have a lot of really tantalizing sexual chemistry, of a kind it feels like we haven’t seen in a rom-com since the 90s. And Gluck, Powell, and Sweeney have no qualms showing off their sexiness, in both comic and romantic circumstances. Individually of course, both actors are great too -Powell especially, whose got a natural movie star screen presence that reminds one of a young Brad Pitt, and that so many critics and commentators have taken note of in recent years. It’s a really good showcase for him, as it is for Sweeney, whose had a slightly more dramatic rise in stardom of late.
There is a polish to much of the movie that suits both of them -like any good movie set at a wedding it takes full of advantage of putting its leads in the most attractive, ever-so-glamourous suits and gowns. Outside of Ben and Bea’s shenanigans, the perfection of wealth, luxury, and atmosphere can be almost comical though -especially in light of the missing Much Ado plot-line that renders Halle and Claudia merely having to deal with a couple obnoxious guests -and the movie has to work hard to make them “ruin” the wedding. The parade of reversals and misunderstandings carries into the final act of the film, which after some genuinely sweet moments -such as one where the pair are stranded on a buoy in the Sydney harbour- feels especially like a lapse in creativity as the film caters to tropes. And it never recovers. Also, the whole general character of Australia through all of this as merely a paradisical backdrop feels kind of lazy in and of itself; and is so shamelessly cliché that of course it must facilitate a big gesture on the steps of the Sydney Opera House.
There are several funny moments in Anyone But You -it is not quite so vapid a rom-com as to be achingly sincere, and it certainly has enough of both edge and genuine sensuality to punt it above your Hallmark tripe. But it does offer little beyond the scope of the talents and performance compatibility of Powell and Sweeney -two actors who definitely should get more leading movie roles, perhaps even the opportunity to work together again; but on some film that is more than just doing so for its own sake.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...