September 4, 2024 • 38 mins
In this episode of Shelf Criticism, Stephen navigates the turbulent waters of The Break-Up, a film that tries to subvert the romantic comedy genre but ends up leaving audiences divided. Delving into its mixed critical reception, Stephen explores how the film's attempt at an "anti-romantic comedy" both falls flat and intriguingly undercuts expectations. The discussion includes personal anecdotes, a critical analysis of the film's narrative flaws and strengths, and a cultural context that examines the waning popularity of romcoms as well as their potential resurgence. Also, surprisingly little discussion of nudity this time.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Oh, come on. You know what? No, that's not what I want.
(00:02):
You just said that you want me to help you do the dishes.
I want you to want to do the dishes.
Why would I want to do dishes? Why?
See, that's my whole point.
(00:25):
Welcome to Shelf Criticism.
Meet your host, Stephen,
a scholar of literature and film by day,
and by night, a cinematic archaeologist
with a penchant for everything from art house to popular
to outright trash cinema.
Over the past quarter century, Stephen has amassed
an eclectic DVD collection,
now occupying five shells of a Curio cabinet in his living room.
(00:47):
Each week, he bravely selects one of these titles to dissect,
drawing him as he unearths everything from obscure gems
to cinematic missteps.
From blockbuster hits to forgotten flops,
each film gets the critical once over it probably doesn't deserve
but will absolutely receive.
So grab your popcorn and settle in.
It's time to dive into the diverse world of Shelf Criticism.
(01:18):
Welcome, everyone, and thanks for tuning in for lucky episode number 13.
I'm really enjoying the side project,
which has given me an excuse to rewatch
and really dig deep into a variety of films,
some favorites, some not,
and others that are just plain oddball aberrations for my DVD shelf.
My collection is eclectic, polite word,
but you could also say slapdash, spasmodic, erratic.
(01:40):
It gives me a chance to delve into a wide variety of genres,
many of which I might not have chosen on my own.
Today's selection is sort of like that as well.
It's a romantic comedy.
As I've stated before, though I feel it bears repeating,
I'm pretty free with expressing opinions on the show.
I mean, there's a lot that I like and plenty that I don't.
Last episode, which was covering a rather mild erotic thriller, for instance,
(02:02):
I went on a digression savaging Adam Sandler for not being funny.
Know what? Some of my listeners may love Sandler,
find his brand of humor side splitting and good for you.
I mean that genuinely.
Watch Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison to your heart's content.
I don't believe in using the phrase guilty pleasure.
If it makes you happy, it can't be that bad.
Words crooned by a sage philosopher named Cheryl Crow,
(02:25):
who plenty of you may not like, but I happen to.
My larger point is please don't take offense or think it's a personal affront
if I make remarks about something you love.
It just means we have different tastes.
That said, I really don't like romantic comedies.
I've not been shy about declaring that and I feel like over the course of now
13 episodes, I've criticized this genre nearly as much as I've talked about nudity,
(02:47):
though neither were planned, I swear.
I just go where my scatterbrained mind takes me.
And today's film is another romcom, meaning I'm preconditioned to dislike it.
If this is a film you like, at least you can rest assured that I always find
something positive to say about even the worst of films that I've watched thus far.
And I've covered the avenging disco Godfather and the red rings of fear.
Also, I'll go ahead and get this out of the way.
(03:08):
This film is one of the better examples of the genre.
I'll admit that Jennifer Aniston has a very powerful screen presence,
which probably goes all the way back to that sitcom she was on that was relatively
popular, the one with the catchy theme song and dancing in a fashion show.
Dancing in a fountain at the beginning.
I also really don't care for that show, but if you do, I'm absolutely tickled.
It brings you joy.
Vince Vaughn is a bit annoying at times coming off as an arrogant and priggish,
(03:31):
but he also has an interesting cadence and a sideways sense of humor.
I find strangely appealing.
So sit back, survey the scene and decide which of these two bickering ex lovers
you're rooting for as we dissect the 2006 film directed by Peyton Reed, the breakup.
So as always, we'll talk about my shelf pick, pick up this DVD and take a look.
The picture on the front of this cover is Vaughn and Aniston.
(03:53):
They're both in bed on opposite sides and what looks like a strip of duct tape
right down the middle.
The actor's names are at the top, the breakup, no, no caps whatsoever on the other
side and then ellipses on the other side and pick a side.
I also just want to really quickly say, I do not know why breakup is hyphenated,
but it is in all the promotional material, everything I see.
(04:14):
I'm pretty sure breakup can just be two separate words.
Correct me if I'm wrong there, you grammar nerds, but actually even
look this up and I could not find a place where it was common to just have
break up. Although sometimes it is done in Great Britain.
Typically we hyphenate compound adjectives. Uh, this is not that it's a noun.
I don't know. Again, the English teacher in me, I don't want to bore you.
So I'm going to shut up there at the very bottom of the front cover.
(04:36):
There is a quote, one of the best American comedies in years says Pete
Hammond of Maxim on the DVD back. We have another quote praising it.
Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston give what may be the best performances of
their careers. Jack Matthews, the New York daily news, Mr.
Matthews, um, maybe overstating that Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston
(04:57):
star in the charming and unpredictable comedy, the breakup after two years
together, Gary and Brooks relationship seems to have taken a comical wrong
turn on the way to happily ever after. Now the breakup is on the lines have
been drawn and their honest feelings for each other are coming out.
Get ready for an all out war of the exes in this fun date movie.
That's hilarious and heartfelt. Then the text is framed with a smiling Vaughn
(05:20):
on one side, Aniston on the other, and then three other pictures below that.
The first two are of Gary and Brooke and the third is of John Favreau and I
can't tell, but it looks like just two other randos sitting at a poker table.
The special features boasts in red letters, DVD exclusives, all caps, and
then an equally huge alternate ending plus over 15 minutes of deleted and
extended scenes and outtakes. So among that are improv with Vince Vaughn and
(05:43):
John Favreau, three brothers, a tour of Chicago hop on board with an amazing
interactive tour of the windy city with a special intro by Vince Vaughn,
feature commentary with Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston, feature commentary
with director Peyton Reed. And then beneath that special features digitally
mastered wide screen presentation, audio, English 5.1, Dolby digital and two
(06:04):
channel Dolby surround. Again, these are not really special trailer subtitles,
English, Spanish interactive menu. That is kind of neat.
When it first comes on, you've got, I think it's the same picture that's on
the cover, but you have the option of either choosing, I think it says
something like pick a side again, and you can either choose his or hers.
And depending on which one, if you choose Jennifer Aniston, for instance,
(06:25):
the background is pink and it plays a different song and you see clips of her
before you hit play. And then of course the opposite with Vince Vaughn and very
gender reinforcing it is blue, a different song, all that good stuff.
It is kind of interesting, something I'd never really noticed on a DVD before.
So they're, they're, they're trying. I mean, this is later 2006, so we were
getting playful with DVDs and menus at that time. Also scene selection and photo
(06:45):
gallery. And it also reminds us down at the bottom that this film is rated PG 13
for sexual content, some nudity and language. I'm going to say this right now
and then not come back around to it for some odd reason, which I swear I didn't
plan and I swear I don't obsess over, I promise, but nudity has been a recurring
topic on this podcast. And when this film came out, I remember all the buzz was
(07:07):
about Jennifer Aniston's backside. There's a scene where she walks into a
kitchen, grabs a Pepsi. Oh, the product placement is awful in this film as well.
And then she strolls back out all while stark naked with Gary watching slack
jawed, but it is a PG 13 film, which as I've learned doing this podcast gets
stricter scrutiny than a made for TV film on Canadian broadcast. The camera
placement is strategic, sometimes cleverly. At one point, a flabbergasted
(07:31):
Gary conveniently blocks the more sensible aspects of Brooke, for instance.
There's a brief moment where she passes into the hallway where an excessively
blurred, out of focus, butt crack is visible. That's it. Nothing more.
Honestly, just again reminds me of the puritanical tendencies that sometimes
emerge during this moment. Gary's engrossed in a boxing game. I didn't
think this was clever as he's playing the PlayStation. His attention shifts
(07:53):
from the game to Brooke and on screen, his character takes a beating, gets
knocked down and the ten count plays out in the background as Brooke passes by
complete knockout. Very interesting the way that cleverly parallels what's
happening in the game and what's happening in the room. Now, for once,
let's talk about something substantial on this podcast and leave the bare
bombs behind. OK, pun intended there. How I came to own it. This one does have
(08:16):
some sentimental value for me. As I've mentioned before, my late wife,
though she loved to give gifts, genuinely wasn't as keen on receiving them.
Birthdays, Christmas, anniversaries, she would insist I get her nothing.
And she especially hated Valentine's Day, a made up holiday, she insisted,
that existed to sell greeting cards and chocolate. I would usually remind her
all holidays are technically made up, but that didn't change her mind. Still,
(08:37):
I did manage to navigate a tolerable compromise somewhere down the line.
I would get her a small gift, maybe two, not spending all that much, but at least
giving her something. Of course, this technically was more challenging because
it meant I had to actually put some thought into something that wasn't
expensive but had deeper meaning. Sometimes I would have preferred just to
simply let the assumed price tag speak for itself. But I knew she had wanted to
see the breakup and we hadn't got around to it. So when Valentine's Day came,
(09:00):
somewhere in the last minute rush of grabbing something tangible, that holiday
in particular was easy because I knew she only expected the bare minimum,
I saw it on a shelf somewhere and grabbed it. I remember handing it to her
and her laughing in that sardonic way she did. She had a rather dark sense of
humor. The breakup, she asked, for Valentine's Day? Are you trying to tell
me something? I laughed and reminded her it was a
romantic comedy, that of course it was going to end with grand gestures of
(09:22):
reconciliation and swelling music as lips locked, probably all in an airport.
It's always airports and these things. That Valentine's Day, which I'm assuming
was 2007, since the DVD release was October 2006,
meaning I also probably paid a deeply discounted price, we cooked together,
opened a bottle of Chardonnay and sat down in front of the television and
watched this film. I remember that particular night pretty
(09:45):
well. Perhaps we had a bit of fun laughing at how wrong I was about the
film. It does defy some expectations which we'll discuss in a moment.
Perhaps it's because there's a moment where Brooke, that's Aniston's character,
looks at Gary and says he could have at least brought her flowers.
Then he reminds her that she told him he hates flowers and she
frustratingly declares every woman loves flowers. You could have thought to
(10:06):
yourself, you know, you could have said, yeah I think I'm gonna get Brooke some
flowers. You said on our very first date that you
don't like flowers, that they're a waste of money.
Every girl likes flowers, Gary. You say that you don't like flowers. I'm supposed
to take that to mean that you do like flowers? No, this is not about, you're not,
you're not, you're, you're not getting it. You're not getting this, Gary. Okay,
it's not about the lemons, it's not about the flowers, it's not about the dishes,
(10:29):
it's just about how many times do I have to drop hints about the ballet?
I distinctly remember my wife who was insistent that I never give her flowers,
cut her eyes at me and sneered. Don't you ever effing get me flowers, she
reiterated. Only she didn't say effing. So when we go to the critical reception,
yikes. This film was not terribly well liked.
(10:50):
It holds a 34% on Rotten Tomatoes and the popcorn meter,
aka the audience score, which is always better, is only 46%.
It actually fared better on Metacritic, which here scored 46 with the critics.
In most cases so far that I've seen, the user score on Metacritic is usually more
critical, more discerning, but here the film netted an 8.1. I'm just going to
(11:11):
stop expecting anything. Every time I think I know something about
Metacritic users or what critics are going to say on Rotten Tomatoes, it gets
blown out of the water. Or maybe it's just that my own personal
opinions about films are as erratic as my DVD collection itself.
Then again, that almost makes sense, doesn't it? From reading the snippets
featured on Rotten Tomatoes, it seems this film marketed itself as an
anti-romantic comedy, which is a sentiment I could have gotten behind.
(11:34):
The only buzz I'd really heard before I watched it was instead, of course, over
Aniston's behind. This makes sense, looking at director
Peyton Reed's filmography. He also directed the 2003 film Down with
Love starring Renee Zellweger and Ewan McGregor, which I remember being a bit
flawed but appreciating because it turned the concept of the rom-com on its
head. Incidentally, for those keeping score,
Reed also directed Bring It On, the Jim Carrey vehicle that I didn't
(11:56):
care for, Yes Man, and also all three of the Ant-Man films from Marvel.
I still haven't seen Quantumania. Somewhere down the line, I guess right
after Endgame, I just fell off. I haven't really watched much from Marvel since
then. Again, this is a film from a while back,
so most of the reviews lead to 404 errors. Websites, especially major news
outlets and publications. I realize you review films every week,
(12:20):
but I beseech you to stop taking them down.
Buy another server or two. Sometimes a person in 2024
might just want to read a review from 2006. Is that so much to ask?
At any rate, I did joke in an earlier podcast about being resistant to buying
a digital subscription to Rolling Stone since I already subscribed to the print
version, meaning I should have access. But Peter Travers is a major critic and
(12:40):
it wasn't that much for the subscription. Before I balked at just the simple
principle, but I realized I may have to scour these archives from other
episodes, so here we go. I have spent money on much less
sensible purchases. So with my nearly wide open access to the venerable
Rolling Stones archives, let's see what Peter Travers has to say.
He begins, Vince Vaughn is the best friend a movie comedy could have.
(13:03):
He's funny, hilariously so, while keeping his characters grounded in messy reality.
Last summer he hit a peak with The Wedding Crashers, playing a horn dog
reformed by the right woman. The Break Up, co-starring Jennifer Aniston
as the babe who splits when she can't tame him, isn't in that playful league.
It's about as playful as a python. Based on a story by Vaughn, who also produces,
this film shows what happens when love turns into a weapon of mutual destruction.
(13:28):
After a brief courtship that, going back to quoting him,
happens in the opening credits, then come the fights. He doesn't do the dishes
unless he's asked. She doesn't understand his needs. They
break up, but neither will leave the condo, which director Peyton Reed, bring it
on yeah, down with love nay, turns into a war zone. She dumps him, hoping
he'll change. He says fine, hoping she'll change. She
(13:50):
brings men home, gets a bikini wax, the Tele Savalas, and walks around naked.
He brings home a pool table and slob pals, stalemate.
Dear lord, even Travers has to mention on the naked.
Y'all, it's literally a butt. We all have them. Even one of the biggest
A-listers of all time in Jennifer Aniston. Just
settle down. Let's talk about that battle though. For starters, all that before
(14:12):
and during the opening credits stuff that
Gary literally sees Brooke a few seats down from him and his friend at a Cubs
game. One that she's attending, I might add, with her boyfriend.
Even if he is wearing a visor and a polo shirt tucked into plaid shorts.
Gary openly flirts, and as they are exiting after the game, he blocks Brooke
from walking out with the said fellow, pressing the issue until she,
(14:33):
I mean, she doesn't actually do anything on the screen to agree with him, but we
go to this opening credits which are filled with a bunch of photos of the two,
letting the audience know that they're now dating. 18 years later,
I mean his aggressive approach comes off as way less charming and more stalkery.
I would like to think it did back in 2006 as well, but
who knows. The big fight that spells doom for the relationship begins when Gary
(14:56):
comes home from a hard day of work, wants to plop on the couch and watch the Cubs
game. However, tonight both his and her family are coming over for dinner and
she needs his help, or at the very least for him to shower.
He nags and whines until her parents show up and then runs for the shower.
After an awkward family dinner, Gary's working-class Polish family, seemingly
charming, if not rough around the edges, clashing with
Brooke's presumably bourgeois, educated parents and brother, she
(15:19):
exhaustedly asks him to help with the dishes.
He seems quite content to grab his controller and play a little Grand Theft
Auto, and this is the catalyst for the blow-up.
At this point, I felt not even the slightest bit of sympathy for Gary,
and this is coming from a fellow who prides himself in trying to see every
side of an issue. Gary's tired from work, his feet hurt.
If he was the only one out there making the cash, then I might see his point, but
(15:40):
Brooke clearly notes she worked a full eight hours too before coming home and
slaving over the stove, and when Gary declares he's doing this so he can make a
living sufficient that Brooke doesn't have to work, she
rightfully retorts that she wants to work. I mean that sort of outdated
nonsense is not going to win Gary any favors, both with Brooke or the audience.
Travers concludes his review with credit Vaughn and Aniston for dropping the
(16:01):
Glam Act and joining writers Jeremy Garlick
and Jay Lavender. It's G-A-R-E-L-I-C-K. Again, if I'm mispronouncing it. Hey,
garlic is delicious. I love it in food. Anyway, joining those writers in the
risky task of turning a formula sex comedy on its empty head,
you won't leave the breakup with a skip in your step. It's more like a nod in
(16:21):
your gut. Until a cop-out ending, this is War of
the Roses territory where laughs take no prisoners.
I do appreciate the ending, which leaves a lot open to interpretation.
That said, perhaps it's time to move on to the next segment,
My Take. As I was touching on earlier, when the initial vitriol
that we can all sense seething beneath the surface finally pops off,
(16:43):
it's almost painfully one-sided. I can't imagine anyone who
isn't an incel on 8chan message boards siding with anyone but Brooke here.
Gary's a self-centered man-child who can't see past his own selfish desires.
Every point Brooke makes is salient. I would assume there's more to the story
we don't see. Late in the film, Brooke does suggest
that she too contributed to the dissolution of this relationship because
(17:04):
she could have found room for a pool table. Wow, that's harsh.
Sarcasm there. But we the viewer are never really treated to what she's done,
aside from that. I understand that this film focuses on the breakup itself,
and it already runs an hour 45, so it pushes dangerously close to the span
that a casual audience would lose interest.
Still, I would have liked to have seen a bit more of the relationship than a
(17:25):
montage of photos during the opening credits.
I think it would have made for a better film if we could have seen a moment here or there
where Brooke also was being a bit selfish or irrational.
As it stands, when the argument does occur, I can't imagine a single viewer
thinking Gary has even the slightest of a case.
And that may be intentional. During the scenes where Gary and Johnny O,
that is Jon Favreau's character, talk in the conspicuously deserted bar,
(17:47):
which I believe is called the Skylark, and it seems Johnny owns it or at least
works at it, and I wonder how he makes a living because
there's one person drinking in a corner besides Gary, and I'm assuming with Gary
being his best bud that he's drinking for free.
Either way, Favreau gives an impression speech about how Gary is the life of the
party, the one everyone enjoys being around, but how he also never does
anything he doesn't want to do. The point of the entire film may be with
(18:09):
a focus on Gary and his growth as a person.
Personally, however, I would have liked to have seen something a bit more nuanced.
It might be nice to see how both Brooke and Gary had contributed to the decline
of the relationship. Maybe Brooke could come off as something
less than blameless. That's decidedly a different film, and
apparently that wasn't what they were going for, but I still think it might have
been a bit more interesting. For a comedy, there are also very few
(18:30):
moments of humor, at least ones that appeal to my sense.
The dialogue is sharp and often has zingers, including much of Vaughn's
trademark bantering, especially when he and Favreau share
scenes. They're rapid-fire quips reminiscent of maid and swingers,
though here none of it's nearly as amusing. That's not to say there aren't
moments, such as Vaughn trash-talking a prepubescent he's delivering a beat down
to in an online football match on PlayStation,
(18:53):
or how when Brooke's date comes in, supposedly to make Gary jealous,
he joins Gary for a game of PlayStation and continues after leaving
on the date just to talk about how great Gary is, how wonderful he is.
Brooke gets fed up and leaves her date in the taxi, and he hangs his head out the
window and says, tell Gary to call me. That and the whole scene in the bar
where Johnny O says he'll quote, take care of the man Brooke brought over,
(19:15):
all that did make me chuckle. But most of the other bits were subtle
enough to only elicit an, yeah, I see what you did there,
nod or, I don't know, they just, I don't think they landed the way the
filmmakers thought they would. The worst offender here is Justin Long's
portrayal of Christopher, the ad man at the Marilyn Dean gallery.
It's been a common trope of romantic comedies, The Woman in Red, Reality Bites,
My Best Friend's Wedding, countless others, to make use of
(19:37):
the gay best friend. Perhaps it was well-intentioned effort for inclusion,
but most of the time it comes off as crass and stereotypical.
This could be an attempt by the breakup to critique the romantic comedy
conventions, but if so, it strays into caricature rather than
insightful parody and ultimately misses the mark.
As far as that ending that Travers mentions, I think it's one of the stronger
(19:57):
points of the film. There are some nice swerves leading up
to the final scene, with their shared condo sold and the couple having two
weeks to vacate. In a last-ditch effort to salvage something,
Brooke mentions she has two tickets to see the old 97, which incidentally, pretty
good band, in concert and that she bought them before the breakup.
Gary agrees to show and she leaves the tickets at Will Call, only to be stood up.
Later that night when Gary comes home, she's in her room crying.
(20:20):
After a heartfelt speech, it all finally sinks in for Gary.
He steps close to try to make amends, but she tells him to go away.
Yeah, same guy who cornered her after a Cubs game with her boyfriend, as if she
was on a date, and badgered her to go out with him.
Yeah, now he relents and leaves the room. The concert,
this heartfelt moment, both of those set us up to expect that
music-swelling, grand gesture, emotional moment,
(20:43):
even without an airport, and neither one comes to fruition.
But at least Gary realized what a jerk he's been, grown as a person.
As their time to vacate the condo grows near, Brooke comes home escorting Carson,
a handsome wealthy man whom she sold a piece of art at the gallery to and who
earlier had asked her out. She finds out that Gary has cooked a
romantic dinner and set the table. Carson excuses himself and waits outside
(21:05):
while Gary pours his heart out with an emotional speech.
Ah, this is the moment, right? No, in one of the most stone-cold moments
probably in film history, Brooke looks him dead in the eye and says,
I don't feel the same way. Ouch. Oh, and perhaps worth noting, she hadn't
brought Carson back for a romantic tryst, but rather to show him a piece of her
own personal art collection she was trying to sell.
(21:27):
Still, the film is just toying with us, right? Perhaps we shouldn't be so sure.
It's clear the entire time that Brooke initiated the breakup,
tried to date other men, even got the tele-cevalus just to show Gary the error
of his ways and have him come crawling back.
However, what she tells him in this scene clearly articulates that she's changed
her mind. She doesn't feel the same way about him
anymore, but she's just deceiving herself, right? And in the process, deceiving the
(21:50):
audience. We've already been told she's going to
do some traveling, put a few miles on her soul.
Ah, now we see where this is going, right? Improbable overblown airport scene.
Gary will be scampering to O'Hare to convince her not to get on that plane.
Yeah, not really. We see the seasons pass. We see Gary doing a tour of Chicago on
that boat that he and his brothers have been planning to buy.
(22:12):
At least he's doing well professionally. Then we see Brooke walking down a
crowded sidewalk just as Gary is stepping out of a store, arms laden with
packages. It's clearly chilly out by the way they're
dressed, so I assume it's Christmas, though it isn't stated and I don't
remember seeing any lights or jingling music to clue us in. Doesn't matter.
The two stop and have a pleasant conversation, smiling, telling the other
how good they look. He's heard her travels went well. She's
(22:34):
heard the three brothers got that boat. She even says when it warms up she'll
have to come take a tour. Oh Gary, I was so foolish. No Brooke, it was I who was
short-sighted. My life without you is... There are no more words necessary. Gary
drops his bags in the middle of the sidewalk. They embrace and kiss while
stunned pedestrians stare and clap or others huff as they have to walk around,
(22:56):
but it's a grand gesture. Disgusting bit of PDA. Love triumphant.
And that's how a conventional rom-com would end. Instead,
Gary and Brooke say bye and walk in separate directions. Granted they do,
turnaround is still one last glance. Brooke giving him the lovely Aniston
smile, Gary winking suavely at her. Roll credits. Let those surface-level
(23:16):
moviegoers conditioned to watch the genre conventions fall neatly into place
gasp and pout that their expectations went unfulfilled. As a hardened cynic
like me, or at least a fellow who appreciates unpredictability, gives a
slow clap. Travers isn't wrong that this ending is far less bitter than War of
the Roses, which I also loved. I'm not going to spoil that film because if you
(23:36):
haven't seen it, it may be the ultimate send-up of romantic comedies.
Suffice to say the breakup leaves the door open. Brooke might come take the
boat tour. Gary might suggest getting a drink afterwards, catching up. They
might reconnect and realize they can't live without each other.
Or maybe, like so many of us, Brooke will never make good on that promise.
We all say we're going to have to get together when we see old friends and
(23:58):
acquaintances, and I don't know about you, but I really am well-meaning when I
say it, but I never follow through. Brooke's back at the Maryland Dean
Gallery, she has her bowling league, her time with Addie, she's already adjusted
to life without Gary. Chicago is a huge city, so what are the odds of another
chance encounter? And even if that happened, what are the odds she'll once
again say she'll have to come take a boat tour only to get busy again and
(24:19):
forget? It's equally probable when the two left that condo for the last time, it
was just as empty as the promises that are made here.
You have to admit, it was a solid sense of closure, more than a lot of us get
from a failed relationship. Or maybe, just maybe, I'm a terrible
cynic who's watched one too many romantic comedies only to scoff at their
predictability. Perhaps I should steer clear of any film where love might
(24:41):
triumph after all, but where's the fun in that? Standout
performances. This film is chocked full of recognizable names and faces.
I mentioned Favreau, but there are plenty of others. Vincent D'Onofrio and
Cole Howser play Gary's brothers. Also, I need to pause here. Howser's
character is named Lupus. First, I thought they were saying Lucas, but no,
Lupus. I understand that's Latin for wolf and he acts like one when he's pursuing
(25:05):
women, so it's kind of fitting, but all I could think about was the
autoimmune disorder. Jason Bateman and Peter Billingsley, that is Ralphie from A
Christmas Story, are two of the couple's long-suffering friends, and Margaret is
in a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo as Brooke's mother.
All of them are every bit as good as one might expect. John Michael Higgins is, as
always, a treat to watch on screen. Here he's Brooke's brother and a cappella
(25:27):
enthusiast who belongs to a group of crooners who call themselves the Tone
Rangers. I do love a good pun. Delightful as he is, it is strongly
suggested that he too is gay, a point that Gary asserts in an argument
and Brooke denies. The suggestion is that he's closeted and
in the alternate ending he's paired with Christopher as soloist during an
acapella performance, further suggesting they're never confirming his sexuality.
(25:50):
Again, this all feels like a joke and not a very funny one.
I'm sure the filmmakers weren't intending to punch down, but it kind of
felt like they did. So that said, I have to give this category
to Joey Lauren Adams, who plays Addie, Brooke's best friend and confidant.
At least the film does have the good sense not to make the gay co-worker also
the sage voice of reason and go all in on that stereotype. Instead,
that role falls to Addie, married and juggling two rambunctious
(26:12):
children, all the while taking calls to hear Brooke complain, offering advice,
reassuring her eavesdropping husband, not all men, honey, and providing a calming
presence that also presents some of the wittiest portions of the film,
delivered dry and deadpan, but still very effective.
She's loyal, disapproving of many of Brooke's actions, but unafraid to call her
out, just never in front of others, always
(26:34):
rebuking in private. It's a perfect best friend. I know that
the great laugh lines come from Addie as well.
After a failed date, Brooke is hanging out around Addie's house wanting to make
Gary think she's out having a blast. Addie's just going through her regular
routine, at this point scrubbing both children in the bathtub while talking to
Brooke, who sits on the toilet. Not like that, she's just using it as a
(26:54):
seat. While offering advice, she takes the soap from one child who's putting it in
her mouth and casually says, save that for when you're 12. And that was funny
enough for me, the suggestion that a misbehaving tween would need her mouth
washed out with soap in the future, but it became funnier when I realized that
her husband is portrayed by Peter Billingsley.
Of course, one of the most iconic scenes in A Christmas Story is when Ralphie, who
I believe is actually 12 years old in the film,
(27:16):
utters the infamous fudge, only I didn't say fudge line, and subsequently gets his
mouth washed out with soap. Nice subtle callback, I like that.
Either way, Adams is quite talented, even if she was consistently relegated to side
and bit characters after carrying Chasing Amy in the leading role, or
semi-leading role. I would have liked to have seen her more roles,
specifically larger ones, and I say I would have been, like she's
(27:39):
retired or something. I did look, she has a film in post-production or
distribution perhaps by now called Oak, it's currently slated for a January
2025 release, and it looks like she's got top billing.
I'm not sure what the production value is or how it's going to be distributed,
but at least that's something. And yeah, I suppose she did have a lot of
screen time in Big Daddy, but nah, I'm not going to go on another
(28:00):
tirade about Sandler. I want to talk briefly about the cultural
context here. By the time the breakup was released,
audiences were seeing an influx of films that were already challenging the rosy
depictions of relationships seen in earlier decades.
You had Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mine, for instance, and then
500 Days of Summer comes a little bit later than the breakup, but
(28:20):
it was conceptualized around the same time, and those provided a more nuanced
and less optimistic take on romance. So I think the breakup fits nicely into
this trend by providing a more raw and less idealized look at the dissolution
of a relationship, signaling a shift in how romantic stories
will be told. Despite or perhaps because of its
unconventional approach to the romantic comedy genre, the breakup did receive
(28:42):
mixed reviews and had varied audience reactions.
Its depiction of a realistic breakup, devoid of reconciliation or clear
resolution, challenged audiences' expectations and received praise for its
boldness, while also drawing criticism from those
expecting a more traditional romantic structure.
The romantic comedy did see a bit of a decline in popularity after what, mid-2000?
Right about this time. Partially I think that was due to fatigue,
(29:04):
predictable plots, challenging social attitudes towards
relationships and gender roles. Also the rise in the Marvel cinematic
universe and other superhero franchises, I think, has significantly
reshaped the landscape of the film industry.
Beginning with Iron Man in 2008, the overwhelming success of these
blockbuster films shifted Hollywood's focus towards genres promising substantial
(29:24):
box office return and global audience appeal.
This shift in particular has, it seems, impacted the production visibility of
romantic comedies, which is a genre traditionally known for its smaller scale
and character-driven narratives. As studios increasingly prioritized
action-packed high-budget films, the space for
traditional rom-coms and theaters began to dwindle.
Superhero films often dominate the screening schedules, leveraging their
(29:47):
mass appeal and extensive marketing to capture a broader audience.
This dominance not only limits the theatrical release windows available for
romantic comedies, but it diverts financial and creative resources towards
franchise-based cinema, which further sidelines smaller genres like this.
However, the decline in traditional venues for rom-coms has been offset, it
seems, recently by the rise of streaming platforms.
(30:08):
Services like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime have become new homes for romantic
comedies, allowing them to thrive outside of the conventional theatrical model.
These programs cater to niche audiences and enable the production of diverse
content that might not secure a wide release in cinemas overwhelmed by
blockbuster spectacle. We've recently seen films like No Hard
Feelings, Anyone But You, and Fly Me to the Moon gain traction among streaming
(30:30):
audiences. I say we, I've not seen any of those three.
As a result, while cinematic space for rom-coms has contracted, their presence
has morphed and expanded to digital. I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Not necessarily the re-emergence of the genre, which I'm wholly agnostic about,
but rather the larger cultural trend towards consumption of films at home
instead of in the theater. I realize the irony of saying this on a
(30:51):
show that touts my DVD collection, but I do fear for the survival and
longevity of movie theaters. Going to the cinema needs to remain a
cornerstone of culture. Watching a film in public, surrounded by others, hearing the
audience react, seeing the director's vision realized on a large screen with
high-tech surround sound is important. And this isn't just true with
action-packed blockbusters. Those smaller character-driven films are heck
(31:13):
just anything with some originality. Something that's not a sequel, remake,
reboot, otherwise well-known IP would be refreshing. But I digress.
Imagine that. Looks like I'm gonna run long, so let's get into trivia.
In the dinner party scene early in the film, the man who plays Brooke's father,
Howard, is actually Vernon Vaughn, Vince Vaughn's actual father.
Jennifer Aniston's character Brooke gets a Tely Savalas wax job during the movie,
(31:36):
and I'm not explaining that. You can figure it out on your own.
In real life, Savalas was Aniston's godfather. Savalas and Aniston's father,
John Aniston, were good friends. John Aniston, incidentally, is also an actor
best known for playing Victor on Days of Our Lives. I'm dying inside a little that
I know that. When leaving the ticket at Will Call for
Gary, Brooke says the guy coming to get it is tall,
like freakishly tall. Vince Vaughn is six foot five.
(32:00):
The original ending featured Brooke and Gary running into one another in an art
festival. The dialogue was almost word for word,
except both characters are now their new significant others, both of whom are
deliberately similar to the exes. In fact, to put it in modern day internet
parlance, they're Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston if you ordered them off
Wish. There are a number of reasons this was
reshot, including the fact that the original gag here was reminiscent of one
(32:22):
in Annie Hall, where it would include subtitles of what they and their new
partners were thinking. According to Vaughn on the DVD commentary
of this scene, there were lines like Gary wondering if he could kick this new guy's
and I won't say that word, but you know it. Then we cut to the new Bo of Brooke,
who's wondering, surprise, I wonder if I could kick Gary's.
Yeah, Gary's girlfriend at one point thinks a threat towards Brooke,
(32:43):
something along the lines of I'll scratch your eyes out if you try to get
him back, and I'm assuming this would all be played
over the actual dialogue, which is rather pleasant if not awkward.
You can watch the scene on the DVD and even though the attended subtitles were
never superimposed, clearly without them the scene really
doesn't work. Also it ends with that tone rangers concert I mentioned earlier.
(33:04):
While that does nicely tie up both Richard and Christopher's arcs,
they're minor characters and in doing so after completing Brooke and Gary, the
main characters arcs, it just didn't work. Plus they sing the
entire song, Rainbow Connection I think it's called, I've never heard it outside
of this, but it goes on for maybe two minutes, it
feels like ten. The reshoot was a good idea.
(33:24):
All right, let's go ahead and put this one in the book and move on to Shelf
Esteem. For those of you new to this or need a
reminder, there are five shelves on my DVD curio, so I use the
bartender's model. Good stuff on the top shelf, rotgut on
the bottom shelf, and then you've got second, mid, and fourth
shelf in between. I appreciate the unpredictability of this
(33:46):
film, especially the places where it sets us up to recognize conditioned tropes
only to pull the rug out from under us. I can appreciate the attempt to make an
anti-romantic comedy. It certainly undermines the expected
romance, but it also seems to have forgotten the comedy part as well.
It's just not terribly funny, which would be fine if it hadn't marketed itself as
such. Speaking of marketing, watching the
(34:06):
trailer makes it clear that the ad campaign was desperately trying to sell
this as a rom-com. It's cut with amusing quips and snippets of
light-hearted scenes. Sure, there's some tension evident, but
nothing to suggest that a viewer will encounter
anything more than the typical roadblocks that all couples in this genre
face. The music's even peppy and upbeat, it's a song that I don't think is even
featured in the film. Oh yeah, and the whole infamous nude walk?
(34:28):
It's shown almost in its entirety, aside from the final payoff, if
one can call a severely out-of-focus Aniston crack a payoff.
In other words, let's cynically also appeal to the male population, who will
have to take their dates to see this. At least I think that's the assumption
of the trailer. Looking at the reactions of both the critics and the audience,
it's clear the film failed to live up to either one's expectations.
(34:50):
It's too bitter and somber to appeal to the surface-level audience.
It's not nearly clever enough in its subversion to impress the critics.
It's so clearly inspired by the War of the Roses, perhaps it should have taken
more cues from that and just gone all out over the top.
But it doesn't, and the end product is a promising premise
loaded with star power that falls completely flat.
(35:11):
All that makes it a natural fit for the...
Fourth Shelf. As described in my rubric, the Fourth Shelf is for
films that may have significant flaws or only appeal to specific tastes.
Watch if you're interested or a fan of the genre. And if you're a fan of the
rom-com, then you owe it to yourself to watch this deconstruction of it.
(35:32):
If you love Jennifer Aniston, this isn't a bad performance by her.
If you like Vince Vaughn's unique cadence and brand of verbal whip, you
might like it too. The rest of you, I'm pretty sure you can happily navigate the
rest of your life without ever having spent 105 minutes in front of the TV
while this plays. Well, I got through all that and I think I
showed some impressive restraint, y'all, not making the film's most
(35:53):
infinite scene the butt of any of my jokes. Sorry. Not only am I not
unashamed of that and my juvenile sense of humor, I revel in it.
Thankfully, next week's film should provide some much-needed respite.
I'll be taking a gander at a nice, stodgy British film with seasoned and
respected actors like Q Grant and Tara Fitzgerald.
It's been ages upon ages since I've seen this one, so let me just take a quick
(36:16):
look at the synopsis and oh dear, I'm in trouble.
Sirens. Sirens is currently streaming on Peacock and is free with ads on Amazon
Prime. If you do watch it and want to talk about
any points, feel free to shoot me an email at steven at shelfcriticism.com.
Remember that's S-T-E-P-H-E-N. You can also find the podcast on Facebook
at Shelf Criticism and don't forget about my other podcast,
(36:38):
Real Lit, where I'm joined by my colleague, The Peerless McKenzie.
You can find that just about anywhere you get your podcast fixed as well as our
official website, reallitpodcast.com and social media
at Real Lit Podcast. Remember that's R-E-E-L,
like a film reel. So with all that said and going over time,
which I did not expect to do with this film, until next time
(37:01):
DVD aficionados, remember to treat yourself to a little shelf indulgence
of your own. Amelia, sing-a-zone.
Shelf Criticism is an Owls of Palace production.
(37:23):
This podcast is in no way connected with the educational institutions the host
is employed by. The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the host and
do not necessarily reflect the views of any other organization with which he is
affiliated. Most images displayed are public domain.
Images and stills from films, descriptions of scenes and passages from
books are used for educational and critical purposes
(37:44):
and not for profit and therefore fall under the terms of fair use.
Listen to me. Promise me that you're not going to do anything.
(38:05):
I got you. It's better if nobody traded. You don't know anything.
What are you talking about? I'll take care of it. I don't want you to take care of any-
John, do me a favor. I'm being serious with you. I know, I know.
Smart. You're smart. No, I'm not. I'm being honest with you. I don't want
anything to happen to me. Me neither.
Oh, come on. You know what? No, that's not what I want.
(00:02):
You just said that you want me to help you do the dishes.
I want you to want to do the dishes.
Why would I want to do dishes? Why?
See, that's my whole point.
(00:25):
Welcome to Shelf Criticism.
Meet your host, Stephen,
a scholar of literature and film by day,
and by night, a cinematic archaeologist
with a penchant for everything from art house to popular
to outright trash cinema.
Over the past quarter century, Stephen has amassed
an eclectic DVD collection,
now occupying five shells of a Curio cabinet in his living room.
(00:47):
Each week, he bravely selects one of these titles to dissect,
drawing him as he unearths everything from obscure gems
to cinematic missteps.
From blockbuster hits to forgotten flops,
each film gets the critical once over it probably doesn't deserve
but will absolutely receive.
So grab your popcorn and settle in.
It's time to dive into the diverse world of Shelf Criticism.
(01:18):
Welcome, everyone, and thanks for tuning in for lucky episode number 13.
I'm really enjoying the side project,
which has given me an excuse to rewatch
and really dig deep into a variety of films,
some favorites, some not,
and others that are just plain oddball aberrations for my DVD shelf.
My collection is eclectic, polite word,
but you could also say slapdash, spasmodic, erratic.
(01:40):
It gives me a chance to delve into a wide variety of genres,
many of which I might not have chosen on my own.
Today's selection is sort of like that as well.
It's a romantic comedy.
As I've stated before, though I feel it bears repeating,
I'm pretty free with expressing opinions on the show.
I mean, there's a lot that I like and plenty that I don't.
Last episode, which was covering a rather mild erotic thriller, for instance,
(02:02):
I went on a digression savaging Adam Sandler for not being funny.
Know what? Some of my listeners may love Sandler,
find his brand of humor side splitting and good for you.
I mean that genuinely.
Watch Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison to your heart's content.
I don't believe in using the phrase guilty pleasure.
If it makes you happy, it can't be that bad.
Words crooned by a sage philosopher named Cheryl Crow,
(02:25):
who plenty of you may not like, but I happen to.
My larger point is please don't take offense or think it's a personal affront
if I make remarks about something you love.
It just means we have different tastes.
That said, I really don't like romantic comedies.
I've not been shy about declaring that and I feel like over the course of now
13 episodes, I've criticized this genre nearly as much as I've talked about nudity,
(02:47):
though neither were planned, I swear.
I just go where my scatterbrained mind takes me.
And today's film is another romcom, meaning I'm preconditioned to dislike it.
If this is a film you like, at least you can rest assured that I always find
something positive to say about even the worst of films that I've watched thus far.
And I've covered the avenging disco Godfather and the red rings of fear.
Also, I'll go ahead and get this out of the way.
(03:08):
This film is one of the better examples of the genre.
I'll admit that Jennifer Aniston has a very powerful screen presence,
which probably goes all the way back to that sitcom she was on that was relatively
popular, the one with the catchy theme song and dancing in a fashion show.
Dancing in a fountain at the beginning.
I also really don't care for that show, but if you do, I'm absolutely tickled.
It brings you joy.
Vince Vaughn is a bit annoying at times coming off as an arrogant and priggish,
(03:31):
but he also has an interesting cadence and a sideways sense of humor.
I find strangely appealing.
So sit back, survey the scene and decide which of these two bickering ex lovers
you're rooting for as we dissect the 2006 film directed by Peyton Reed, the breakup.
So as always, we'll talk about my shelf pick, pick up this DVD and take a look.
The picture on the front of this cover is Vaughn and Aniston.
(03:53):
They're both in bed on opposite sides and what looks like a strip of duct tape
right down the middle.
The actor's names are at the top, the breakup, no, no caps whatsoever on the other
side and then ellipses on the other side and pick a side.
I also just want to really quickly say, I do not know why breakup is hyphenated,
but it is in all the promotional material, everything I see.
(04:14):
I'm pretty sure breakup can just be two separate words.
Correct me if I'm wrong there, you grammar nerds, but actually even
look this up and I could not find a place where it was common to just have
break up. Although sometimes it is done in Great Britain.
Typically we hyphenate compound adjectives. Uh, this is not that it's a noun.
I don't know. Again, the English teacher in me, I don't want to bore you.
So I'm going to shut up there at the very bottom of the front cover.
(04:36):
There is a quote, one of the best American comedies in years says Pete
Hammond of Maxim on the DVD back. We have another quote praising it.
Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston give what may be the best performances of
their careers. Jack Matthews, the New York daily news, Mr.
Matthews, um, maybe overstating that Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston
(04:57):
star in the charming and unpredictable comedy, the breakup after two years
together, Gary and Brooks relationship seems to have taken a comical wrong
turn on the way to happily ever after. Now the breakup is on the lines have
been drawn and their honest feelings for each other are coming out.
Get ready for an all out war of the exes in this fun date movie.
That's hilarious and heartfelt. Then the text is framed with a smiling Vaughn
(05:20):
on one side, Aniston on the other, and then three other pictures below that.
The first two are of Gary and Brooke and the third is of John Favreau and I
can't tell, but it looks like just two other randos sitting at a poker table.
The special features boasts in red letters, DVD exclusives, all caps, and
then an equally huge alternate ending plus over 15 minutes of deleted and
extended scenes and outtakes. So among that are improv with Vince Vaughn and
(05:43):
John Favreau, three brothers, a tour of Chicago hop on board with an amazing
interactive tour of the windy city with a special intro by Vince Vaughn,
feature commentary with Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston, feature commentary
with director Peyton Reed. And then beneath that special features digitally
mastered wide screen presentation, audio, English 5.1, Dolby digital and two
(06:04):
channel Dolby surround. Again, these are not really special trailer subtitles,
English, Spanish interactive menu. That is kind of neat.
When it first comes on, you've got, I think it's the same picture that's on
the cover, but you have the option of either choosing, I think it says
something like pick a side again, and you can either choose his or hers.
And depending on which one, if you choose Jennifer Aniston, for instance,
(06:25):
the background is pink and it plays a different song and you see clips of her
before you hit play. And then of course the opposite with Vince Vaughn and very
gender reinforcing it is blue, a different song, all that good stuff.
It is kind of interesting, something I'd never really noticed on a DVD before.
So they're, they're, they're trying. I mean, this is later 2006, so we were
getting playful with DVDs and menus at that time. Also scene selection and photo
(06:45):
gallery. And it also reminds us down at the bottom that this film is rated PG 13
for sexual content, some nudity and language. I'm going to say this right now
and then not come back around to it for some odd reason, which I swear I didn't
plan and I swear I don't obsess over, I promise, but nudity has been a recurring
topic on this podcast. And when this film came out, I remember all the buzz was
(07:07):
about Jennifer Aniston's backside. There's a scene where she walks into a
kitchen, grabs a Pepsi. Oh, the product placement is awful in this film as well.
And then she strolls back out all while stark naked with Gary watching slack
jawed, but it is a PG 13 film, which as I've learned doing this podcast gets
stricter scrutiny than a made for TV film on Canadian broadcast. The camera
placement is strategic, sometimes cleverly. At one point, a flabbergasted
(07:31):
Gary conveniently blocks the more sensible aspects of Brooke, for instance.
There's a brief moment where she passes into the hallway where an excessively
blurred, out of focus, butt crack is visible. That's it. Nothing more.
Honestly, just again reminds me of the puritanical tendencies that sometimes
emerge during this moment. Gary's engrossed in a boxing game. I didn't
think this was clever as he's playing the PlayStation. His attention shifts
(07:53):
from the game to Brooke and on screen, his character takes a beating, gets
knocked down and the ten count plays out in the background as Brooke passes by
complete knockout. Very interesting the way that cleverly parallels what's
happening in the game and what's happening in the room. Now, for once,
let's talk about something substantial on this podcast and leave the bare
bombs behind. OK, pun intended there. How I came to own it. This one does have
(08:16):
some sentimental value for me. As I've mentioned before, my late wife,
though she loved to give gifts, genuinely wasn't as keen on receiving them.
Birthdays, Christmas, anniversaries, she would insist I get her nothing.
And she especially hated Valentine's Day, a made up holiday, she insisted,
that existed to sell greeting cards and chocolate. I would usually remind her
all holidays are technically made up, but that didn't change her mind. Still,
(08:37):
I did manage to navigate a tolerable compromise somewhere down the line.
I would get her a small gift, maybe two, not spending all that much, but at least
giving her something. Of course, this technically was more challenging because
it meant I had to actually put some thought into something that wasn't
expensive but had deeper meaning. Sometimes I would have preferred just to
simply let the assumed price tag speak for itself. But I knew she had wanted to
see the breakup and we hadn't got around to it. So when Valentine's Day came,
(09:00):
somewhere in the last minute rush of grabbing something tangible, that holiday
in particular was easy because I knew she only expected the bare minimum,
I saw it on a shelf somewhere and grabbed it. I remember handing it to her
and her laughing in that sardonic way she did. She had a rather dark sense of
humor. The breakup, she asked, for Valentine's Day? Are you trying to tell
me something? I laughed and reminded her it was a
romantic comedy, that of course it was going to end with grand gestures of
(09:22):
reconciliation and swelling music as lips locked, probably all in an airport.
It's always airports and these things. That Valentine's Day, which I'm assuming
was 2007, since the DVD release was October 2006,
meaning I also probably paid a deeply discounted price, we cooked together,
opened a bottle of Chardonnay and sat down in front of the television and
watched this film. I remember that particular night pretty
(09:45):
well. Perhaps we had a bit of fun laughing at how wrong I was about the
film. It does defy some expectations which we'll discuss in a moment.
Perhaps it's because there's a moment where Brooke, that's Aniston's character,
looks at Gary and says he could have at least brought her flowers.
Then he reminds her that she told him he hates flowers and she
frustratingly declares every woman loves flowers. You could have thought to
(10:06):
yourself, you know, you could have said, yeah I think I'm gonna get Brooke some
flowers. You said on our very first date that you
don't like flowers, that they're a waste of money.
Every girl likes flowers, Gary. You say that you don't like flowers. I'm supposed
to take that to mean that you do like flowers? No, this is not about, you're not,
you're not, you're, you're not getting it. You're not getting this, Gary. Okay,
it's not about the lemons, it's not about the flowers, it's not about the dishes,
(10:29):
it's just about how many times do I have to drop hints about the ballet?
I distinctly remember my wife who was insistent that I never give her flowers,
cut her eyes at me and sneered. Don't you ever effing get me flowers, she
reiterated. Only she didn't say effing. So when we go to the critical reception,
yikes. This film was not terribly well liked.
(10:50):
It holds a 34% on Rotten Tomatoes and the popcorn meter,
aka the audience score, which is always better, is only 46%.
It actually fared better on Metacritic, which here scored 46 with the critics.
In most cases so far that I've seen, the user score on Metacritic is usually more
critical, more discerning, but here the film netted an 8.1. I'm just going to
(11:11):
stop expecting anything. Every time I think I know something about
Metacritic users or what critics are going to say on Rotten Tomatoes, it gets
blown out of the water. Or maybe it's just that my own personal
opinions about films are as erratic as my DVD collection itself.
Then again, that almost makes sense, doesn't it? From reading the snippets
featured on Rotten Tomatoes, it seems this film marketed itself as an
anti-romantic comedy, which is a sentiment I could have gotten behind.
(11:34):
The only buzz I'd really heard before I watched it was instead, of course, over
Aniston's behind. This makes sense, looking at director
Peyton Reed's filmography. He also directed the 2003 film Down with
Love starring Renee Zellweger and Ewan McGregor, which I remember being a bit
flawed but appreciating because it turned the concept of the rom-com on its
head. Incidentally, for those keeping score,
Reed also directed Bring It On, the Jim Carrey vehicle that I didn't
(11:56):
care for, Yes Man, and also all three of the Ant-Man films from Marvel.
I still haven't seen Quantumania. Somewhere down the line, I guess right
after Endgame, I just fell off. I haven't really watched much from Marvel since
then. Again, this is a film from a while back,
so most of the reviews lead to 404 errors. Websites, especially major news
outlets and publications. I realize you review films every week,
(12:20):
but I beseech you to stop taking them down.
Buy another server or two. Sometimes a person in 2024
might just want to read a review from 2006. Is that so much to ask?
At any rate, I did joke in an earlier podcast about being resistant to buying
a digital subscription to Rolling Stone since I already subscribed to the print
version, meaning I should have access. But Peter Travers is a major critic and
(12:40):
it wasn't that much for the subscription. Before I balked at just the simple
principle, but I realized I may have to scour these archives from other
episodes, so here we go. I have spent money on much less
sensible purchases. So with my nearly wide open access to the venerable
Rolling Stones archives, let's see what Peter Travers has to say.
He begins, Vince Vaughn is the best friend a movie comedy could have.
(13:03):
He's funny, hilariously so, while keeping his characters grounded in messy reality.
Last summer he hit a peak with The Wedding Crashers, playing a horn dog
reformed by the right woman. The Break Up, co-starring Jennifer Aniston
as the babe who splits when she can't tame him, isn't in that playful league.
It's about as playful as a python. Based on a story by Vaughn, who also produces,
this film shows what happens when love turns into a weapon of mutual destruction.
(13:28):
After a brief courtship that, going back to quoting him,
happens in the opening credits, then come the fights. He doesn't do the dishes
unless he's asked. She doesn't understand his needs. They
break up, but neither will leave the condo, which director Peyton Reed, bring it
on yeah, down with love nay, turns into a war zone. She dumps him, hoping
he'll change. He says fine, hoping she'll change. She
(13:50):
brings men home, gets a bikini wax, the Tele Savalas, and walks around naked.
He brings home a pool table and slob pals, stalemate.
Dear lord, even Travers has to mention on the naked.
Y'all, it's literally a butt. We all have them. Even one of the biggest
A-listers of all time in Jennifer Aniston. Just
settle down. Let's talk about that battle though. For starters, all that before
(14:12):
and during the opening credits stuff that
Gary literally sees Brooke a few seats down from him and his friend at a Cubs
game. One that she's attending, I might add, with her boyfriend.
Even if he is wearing a visor and a polo shirt tucked into plaid shorts.
Gary openly flirts, and as they are exiting after the game, he blocks Brooke
from walking out with the said fellow, pressing the issue until she,
(14:33):
I mean, she doesn't actually do anything on the screen to agree with him, but we
go to this opening credits which are filled with a bunch of photos of the two,
letting the audience know that they're now dating. 18 years later,
I mean his aggressive approach comes off as way less charming and more stalkery.
I would like to think it did back in 2006 as well, but
who knows. The big fight that spells doom for the relationship begins when Gary
(14:56):
comes home from a hard day of work, wants to plop on the couch and watch the Cubs
game. However, tonight both his and her family are coming over for dinner and
she needs his help, or at the very least for him to shower.
He nags and whines until her parents show up and then runs for the shower.
After an awkward family dinner, Gary's working-class Polish family, seemingly
charming, if not rough around the edges, clashing with
Brooke's presumably bourgeois, educated parents and brother, she
(15:19):
exhaustedly asks him to help with the dishes.
He seems quite content to grab his controller and play a little Grand Theft
Auto, and this is the catalyst for the blow-up.
At this point, I felt not even the slightest bit of sympathy for Gary,
and this is coming from a fellow who prides himself in trying to see every
side of an issue. Gary's tired from work, his feet hurt.
If he was the only one out there making the cash, then I might see his point, but
(15:40):
Brooke clearly notes she worked a full eight hours too before coming home and
slaving over the stove, and when Gary declares he's doing this so he can make a
living sufficient that Brooke doesn't have to work, she
rightfully retorts that she wants to work. I mean that sort of outdated
nonsense is not going to win Gary any favors, both with Brooke or the audience.
Travers concludes his review with credit Vaughn and Aniston for dropping the
(16:01):
Glam Act and joining writers Jeremy Garlick
and Jay Lavender. It's G-A-R-E-L-I-C-K. Again, if I'm mispronouncing it. Hey,
garlic is delicious. I love it in food. Anyway, joining those writers in the
risky task of turning a formula sex comedy on its empty head,
you won't leave the breakup with a skip in your step. It's more like a nod in
(16:21):
your gut. Until a cop-out ending, this is War of
the Roses territory where laughs take no prisoners.
I do appreciate the ending, which leaves a lot open to interpretation.
That said, perhaps it's time to move on to the next segment,
My Take. As I was touching on earlier, when the initial vitriol
that we can all sense seething beneath the surface finally pops off,
(16:43):
it's almost painfully one-sided. I can't imagine anyone who
isn't an incel on 8chan message boards siding with anyone but Brooke here.
Gary's a self-centered man-child who can't see past his own selfish desires.
Every point Brooke makes is salient. I would assume there's more to the story
we don't see. Late in the film, Brooke does suggest
that she too contributed to the dissolution of this relationship because
(17:04):
she could have found room for a pool table. Wow, that's harsh.
Sarcasm there. But we the viewer are never really treated to what she's done,
aside from that. I understand that this film focuses on the breakup itself,
and it already runs an hour 45, so it pushes dangerously close to the span
that a casual audience would lose interest.
Still, I would have liked to have seen a bit more of the relationship than a
(17:25):
montage of photos during the opening credits.
I think it would have made for a better film if we could have seen a moment here or there
where Brooke also was being a bit selfish or irrational.
As it stands, when the argument does occur, I can't imagine a single viewer
thinking Gary has even the slightest of a case.
And that may be intentional. During the scenes where Gary and Johnny O,
that is Jon Favreau's character, talk in the conspicuously deserted bar,
(17:47):
which I believe is called the Skylark, and it seems Johnny owns it or at least
works at it, and I wonder how he makes a living because
there's one person drinking in a corner besides Gary, and I'm assuming with Gary
being his best bud that he's drinking for free.
Either way, Favreau gives an impression speech about how Gary is the life of the
party, the one everyone enjoys being around, but how he also never does
anything he doesn't want to do. The point of the entire film may be with
(18:09):
a focus on Gary and his growth as a person.
Personally, however, I would have liked to have seen something a bit more nuanced.
It might be nice to see how both Brooke and Gary had contributed to the decline
of the relationship. Maybe Brooke could come off as something
less than blameless. That's decidedly a different film, and
apparently that wasn't what they were going for, but I still think it might have
been a bit more interesting. For a comedy, there are also very few
(18:30):
moments of humor, at least ones that appeal to my sense.
The dialogue is sharp and often has zingers, including much of Vaughn's
trademark bantering, especially when he and Favreau share
scenes. They're rapid-fire quips reminiscent of maid and swingers,
though here none of it's nearly as amusing. That's not to say there aren't
moments, such as Vaughn trash-talking a prepubescent he's delivering a beat down
to in an online football match on PlayStation,
(18:53):
or how when Brooke's date comes in, supposedly to make Gary jealous,
he joins Gary for a game of PlayStation and continues after leaving
on the date just to talk about how great Gary is, how wonderful he is.
Brooke gets fed up and leaves her date in the taxi, and he hangs his head out the
window and says, tell Gary to call me. That and the whole scene in the bar
where Johnny O says he'll quote, take care of the man Brooke brought over,
(19:15):
all that did make me chuckle. But most of the other bits were subtle
enough to only elicit an, yeah, I see what you did there,
nod or, I don't know, they just, I don't think they landed the way the
filmmakers thought they would. The worst offender here is Justin Long's
portrayal of Christopher, the ad man at the Marilyn Dean gallery.
It's been a common trope of romantic comedies, The Woman in Red, Reality Bites,
My Best Friend's Wedding, countless others, to make use of
(19:37):
the gay best friend. Perhaps it was well-intentioned effort for inclusion,
but most of the time it comes off as crass and stereotypical.
This could be an attempt by the breakup to critique the romantic comedy
conventions, but if so, it strays into caricature rather than
insightful parody and ultimately misses the mark.
As far as that ending that Travers mentions, I think it's one of the stronger
(19:57):
points of the film. There are some nice swerves leading up
to the final scene, with their shared condo sold and the couple having two
weeks to vacate. In a last-ditch effort to salvage something,
Brooke mentions she has two tickets to see the old 97, which incidentally, pretty
good band, in concert and that she bought them before the breakup.
Gary agrees to show and she leaves the tickets at Will Call, only to be stood up.
Later that night when Gary comes home, she's in her room crying.
(20:20):
After a heartfelt speech, it all finally sinks in for Gary.
He steps close to try to make amends, but she tells him to go away.
Yeah, same guy who cornered her after a Cubs game with her boyfriend, as if she
was on a date, and badgered her to go out with him.
Yeah, now he relents and leaves the room. The concert,
this heartfelt moment, both of those set us up to expect that
music-swelling, grand gesture, emotional moment,
(20:43):
even without an airport, and neither one comes to fruition.
But at least Gary realized what a jerk he's been, grown as a person.
As their time to vacate the condo grows near, Brooke comes home escorting Carson,
a handsome wealthy man whom she sold a piece of art at the gallery to and who
earlier had asked her out. She finds out that Gary has cooked a
romantic dinner and set the table. Carson excuses himself and waits outside
(21:05):
while Gary pours his heart out with an emotional speech.
Ah, this is the moment, right? No, in one of the most stone-cold moments
probably in film history, Brooke looks him dead in the eye and says,
I don't feel the same way. Ouch. Oh, and perhaps worth noting, she hadn't
brought Carson back for a romantic tryst, but rather to show him a piece of her
own personal art collection she was trying to sell.
(21:27):
Still, the film is just toying with us, right? Perhaps we shouldn't be so sure.
It's clear the entire time that Brooke initiated the breakup,
tried to date other men, even got the tele-cevalus just to show Gary the error
of his ways and have him come crawling back.
However, what she tells him in this scene clearly articulates that she's changed
her mind. She doesn't feel the same way about him
anymore, but she's just deceiving herself, right? And in the process, deceiving the
(21:50):
audience. We've already been told she's going to
do some traveling, put a few miles on her soul.
Ah, now we see where this is going, right? Improbable overblown airport scene.
Gary will be scampering to O'Hare to convince her not to get on that plane.
Yeah, not really. We see the seasons pass. We see Gary doing a tour of Chicago on
that boat that he and his brothers have been planning to buy.
(22:12):
At least he's doing well professionally. Then we see Brooke walking down a
crowded sidewalk just as Gary is stepping out of a store, arms laden with
packages. It's clearly chilly out by the way they're
dressed, so I assume it's Christmas, though it isn't stated and I don't
remember seeing any lights or jingling music to clue us in. Doesn't matter.
The two stop and have a pleasant conversation, smiling, telling the other
how good they look. He's heard her travels went well. She's
(22:34):
heard the three brothers got that boat. She even says when it warms up she'll
have to come take a tour. Oh Gary, I was so foolish. No Brooke, it was I who was
short-sighted. My life without you is... There are no more words necessary. Gary
drops his bags in the middle of the sidewalk. They embrace and kiss while
stunned pedestrians stare and clap or others huff as they have to walk around,
(22:56):
but it's a grand gesture. Disgusting bit of PDA. Love triumphant.
And that's how a conventional rom-com would end. Instead,
Gary and Brooke say bye and walk in separate directions. Granted they do,
turnaround is still one last glance. Brooke giving him the lovely Aniston
smile, Gary winking suavely at her. Roll credits. Let those surface-level
(23:16):
moviegoers conditioned to watch the genre conventions fall neatly into place
gasp and pout that their expectations went unfulfilled. As a hardened cynic
like me, or at least a fellow who appreciates unpredictability, gives a
slow clap. Travers isn't wrong that this ending is far less bitter than War of
the Roses, which I also loved. I'm not going to spoil that film because if you
(23:36):
haven't seen it, it may be the ultimate send-up of romantic comedies.
Suffice to say the breakup leaves the door open. Brooke might come take the
boat tour. Gary might suggest getting a drink afterwards, catching up. They
might reconnect and realize they can't live without each other.
Or maybe, like so many of us, Brooke will never make good on that promise.
We all say we're going to have to get together when we see old friends and
(23:58):
acquaintances, and I don't know about you, but I really am well-meaning when I
say it, but I never follow through. Brooke's back at the Maryland Dean
Gallery, she has her bowling league, her time with Addie, she's already adjusted
to life without Gary. Chicago is a huge city, so what are the odds of another
chance encounter? And even if that happened, what are the odds she'll once
again say she'll have to come take a boat tour only to get busy again and
(24:19):
forget? It's equally probable when the two left that condo for the last time, it
was just as empty as the promises that are made here.
You have to admit, it was a solid sense of closure, more than a lot of us get
from a failed relationship. Or maybe, just maybe, I'm a terrible
cynic who's watched one too many romantic comedies only to scoff at their
predictability. Perhaps I should steer clear of any film where love might
(24:41):
triumph after all, but where's the fun in that? Standout
performances. This film is chocked full of recognizable names and faces.
I mentioned Favreau, but there are plenty of others. Vincent D'Onofrio and
Cole Howser play Gary's brothers. Also, I need to pause here. Howser's
character is named Lupus. First, I thought they were saying Lucas, but no,
Lupus. I understand that's Latin for wolf and he acts like one when he's pursuing
(25:05):
women, so it's kind of fitting, but all I could think about was the
autoimmune disorder. Jason Bateman and Peter Billingsley, that is Ralphie from A
Christmas Story, are two of the couple's long-suffering friends, and Margaret is
in a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo as Brooke's mother.
All of them are every bit as good as one might expect. John Michael Higgins is, as
always, a treat to watch on screen. Here he's Brooke's brother and a cappella
(25:27):
enthusiast who belongs to a group of crooners who call themselves the Tone
Rangers. I do love a good pun. Delightful as he is, it is strongly
suggested that he too is gay, a point that Gary asserts in an argument
and Brooke denies. The suggestion is that he's closeted and
in the alternate ending he's paired with Christopher as soloist during an
acapella performance, further suggesting they're never confirming his sexuality.
(25:50):
Again, this all feels like a joke and not a very funny one.
I'm sure the filmmakers weren't intending to punch down, but it kind of
felt like they did. So that said, I have to give this category
to Joey Lauren Adams, who plays Addie, Brooke's best friend and confidant.
At least the film does have the good sense not to make the gay co-worker also
the sage voice of reason and go all in on that stereotype. Instead,
that role falls to Addie, married and juggling two rambunctious
(26:12):
children, all the while taking calls to hear Brooke complain, offering advice,
reassuring her eavesdropping husband, not all men, honey, and providing a calming
presence that also presents some of the wittiest portions of the film,
delivered dry and deadpan, but still very effective.
She's loyal, disapproving of many of Brooke's actions, but unafraid to call her
out, just never in front of others, always
(26:34):
rebuking in private. It's a perfect best friend. I know that
the great laugh lines come from Addie as well.
After a failed date, Brooke is hanging out around Addie's house wanting to make
Gary think she's out having a blast. Addie's just going through her regular
routine, at this point scrubbing both children in the bathtub while talking to
Brooke, who sits on the toilet. Not like that, she's just using it as a
(26:54):
seat. While offering advice, she takes the soap from one child who's putting it in
her mouth and casually says, save that for when you're 12. And that was funny
enough for me, the suggestion that a misbehaving tween would need her mouth
washed out with soap in the future, but it became funnier when I realized that
her husband is portrayed by Peter Billingsley.
Of course, one of the most iconic scenes in A Christmas Story is when Ralphie, who
I believe is actually 12 years old in the film,
(27:16):
utters the infamous fudge, only I didn't say fudge line, and subsequently gets his
mouth washed out with soap. Nice subtle callback, I like that.
Either way, Adams is quite talented, even if she was consistently relegated to side
and bit characters after carrying Chasing Amy in the leading role, or
semi-leading role. I would have liked to have seen her more roles,
specifically larger ones, and I say I would have been, like she's
(27:39):
retired or something. I did look, she has a film in post-production or
distribution perhaps by now called Oak, it's currently slated for a January
2025 release, and it looks like she's got top billing.
I'm not sure what the production value is or how it's going to be distributed,
but at least that's something. And yeah, I suppose she did have a lot of
screen time in Big Daddy, but nah, I'm not going to go on another
(28:00):
tirade about Sandler. I want to talk briefly about the cultural
context here. By the time the breakup was released,
audiences were seeing an influx of films that were already challenging the rosy
depictions of relationships seen in earlier decades.
You had Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mine, for instance, and then
500 Days of Summer comes a little bit later than the breakup, but
(28:20):
it was conceptualized around the same time, and those provided a more nuanced
and less optimistic take on romance. So I think the breakup fits nicely into
this trend by providing a more raw and less idealized look at the dissolution
of a relationship, signaling a shift in how romantic stories
will be told. Despite or perhaps because of its
unconventional approach to the romantic comedy genre, the breakup did receive
(28:42):
mixed reviews and had varied audience reactions.
Its depiction of a realistic breakup, devoid of reconciliation or clear
resolution, challenged audiences' expectations and received praise for its
boldness, while also drawing criticism from those
expecting a more traditional romantic structure.
The romantic comedy did see a bit of a decline in popularity after what, mid-2000?
Right about this time. Partially I think that was due to fatigue,
(29:04):
predictable plots, challenging social attitudes towards
relationships and gender roles. Also the rise in the Marvel cinematic
universe and other superhero franchises, I think, has significantly
reshaped the landscape of the film industry.
Beginning with Iron Man in 2008, the overwhelming success of these
blockbuster films shifted Hollywood's focus towards genres promising substantial
(29:24):
box office return and global audience appeal.
This shift in particular has, it seems, impacted the production visibility of
romantic comedies, which is a genre traditionally known for its smaller scale
and character-driven narratives. As studios increasingly prioritized
action-packed high-budget films, the space for
traditional rom-coms and theaters began to dwindle.
Superhero films often dominate the screening schedules, leveraging their
(29:47):
mass appeal and extensive marketing to capture a broader audience.
This dominance not only limits the theatrical release windows available for
romantic comedies, but it diverts financial and creative resources towards
franchise-based cinema, which further sidelines smaller genres like this.
However, the decline in traditional venues for rom-coms has been offset, it
seems, recently by the rise of streaming platforms.
(30:08):
Services like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime have become new homes for romantic
comedies, allowing them to thrive outside of the conventional theatrical model.
These programs cater to niche audiences and enable the production of diverse
content that might not secure a wide release in cinemas overwhelmed by
blockbuster spectacle. We've recently seen films like No Hard
Feelings, Anyone But You, and Fly Me to the Moon gain traction among streaming
(30:30):
audiences. I say we, I've not seen any of those three.
As a result, while cinematic space for rom-coms has contracted, their presence
has morphed and expanded to digital. I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Not necessarily the re-emergence of the genre, which I'm wholly agnostic about,
but rather the larger cultural trend towards consumption of films at home
instead of in the theater. I realize the irony of saying this on a
(30:51):
show that touts my DVD collection, but I do fear for the survival and
longevity of movie theaters. Going to the cinema needs to remain a
cornerstone of culture. Watching a film in public, surrounded by others, hearing the
audience react, seeing the director's vision realized on a large screen with
high-tech surround sound is important. And this isn't just true with
action-packed blockbusters. Those smaller character-driven films are heck
(31:13):
just anything with some originality. Something that's not a sequel, remake,
reboot, otherwise well-known IP would be refreshing. But I digress.
Imagine that. Looks like I'm gonna run long, so let's get into trivia.
In the dinner party scene early in the film, the man who plays Brooke's father,
Howard, is actually Vernon Vaughn, Vince Vaughn's actual father.
Jennifer Aniston's character Brooke gets a Tely Savalas wax job during the movie,
(31:36):
and I'm not explaining that. You can figure it out on your own.
In real life, Savalas was Aniston's godfather. Savalas and Aniston's father,
John Aniston, were good friends. John Aniston, incidentally, is also an actor
best known for playing Victor on Days of Our Lives. I'm dying inside a little that
I know that. When leaving the ticket at Will Call for
Gary, Brooke says the guy coming to get it is tall,
like freakishly tall. Vince Vaughn is six foot five.
(32:00):
The original ending featured Brooke and Gary running into one another in an art
festival. The dialogue was almost word for word,
except both characters are now their new significant others, both of whom are
deliberately similar to the exes. In fact, to put it in modern day internet
parlance, they're Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston if you ordered them off
Wish. There are a number of reasons this was
reshot, including the fact that the original gag here was reminiscent of one
(32:22):
in Annie Hall, where it would include subtitles of what they and their new
partners were thinking. According to Vaughn on the DVD commentary
of this scene, there were lines like Gary wondering if he could kick this new guy's
and I won't say that word, but you know it. Then we cut to the new Bo of Brooke,
who's wondering, surprise, I wonder if I could kick Gary's.
Yeah, Gary's girlfriend at one point thinks a threat towards Brooke,
(32:43):
something along the lines of I'll scratch your eyes out if you try to get
him back, and I'm assuming this would all be played
over the actual dialogue, which is rather pleasant if not awkward.
You can watch the scene on the DVD and even though the attended subtitles were
never superimposed, clearly without them the scene really
doesn't work. Also it ends with that tone rangers concert I mentioned earlier.
(33:04):
While that does nicely tie up both Richard and Christopher's arcs,
they're minor characters and in doing so after completing Brooke and Gary, the
main characters arcs, it just didn't work. Plus they sing the
entire song, Rainbow Connection I think it's called, I've never heard it outside
of this, but it goes on for maybe two minutes, it
feels like ten. The reshoot was a good idea.
(33:24):
All right, let's go ahead and put this one in the book and move on to Shelf
Esteem. For those of you new to this or need a
reminder, there are five shelves on my DVD curio, so I use the
bartender's model. Good stuff on the top shelf, rotgut on
the bottom shelf, and then you've got second, mid, and fourth
shelf in between. I appreciate the unpredictability of this
(33:46):
film, especially the places where it sets us up to recognize conditioned tropes
only to pull the rug out from under us. I can appreciate the attempt to make an
anti-romantic comedy. It certainly undermines the expected
romance, but it also seems to have forgotten the comedy part as well.
It's just not terribly funny, which would be fine if it hadn't marketed itself as
such. Speaking of marketing, watching the
(34:06):
trailer makes it clear that the ad campaign was desperately trying to sell
this as a rom-com. It's cut with amusing quips and snippets of
light-hearted scenes. Sure, there's some tension evident, but
nothing to suggest that a viewer will encounter
anything more than the typical roadblocks that all couples in this genre
face. The music's even peppy and upbeat, it's a song that I don't think is even
featured in the film. Oh yeah, and the whole infamous nude walk?
(34:28):
It's shown almost in its entirety, aside from the final payoff, if
one can call a severely out-of-focus Aniston crack a payoff.
In other words, let's cynically also appeal to the male population, who will
have to take their dates to see this. At least I think that's the assumption
of the trailer. Looking at the reactions of both the critics and the audience,
it's clear the film failed to live up to either one's expectations.
(34:50):
It's too bitter and somber to appeal to the surface-level audience.
It's not nearly clever enough in its subversion to impress the critics.
It's so clearly inspired by the War of the Roses, perhaps it should have taken
more cues from that and just gone all out over the top.
But it doesn't, and the end product is a promising premise
loaded with star power that falls completely flat.
(35:11):
All that makes it a natural fit for the...
Fourth Shelf. As described in my rubric, the Fourth Shelf is for
films that may have significant flaws or only appeal to specific tastes.
Watch if you're interested or a fan of the genre. And if you're a fan of the
rom-com, then you owe it to yourself to watch this deconstruction of it.
(35:32):
If you love Jennifer Aniston, this isn't a bad performance by her.
If you like Vince Vaughn's unique cadence and brand of verbal whip, you
might like it too. The rest of you, I'm pretty sure you can happily navigate the
rest of your life without ever having spent 105 minutes in front of the TV
while this plays. Well, I got through all that and I think I
showed some impressive restraint, y'all, not making the film's most
(35:53):
infinite scene the butt of any of my jokes. Sorry. Not only am I not
unashamed of that and my juvenile sense of humor, I revel in it.
Thankfully, next week's film should provide some much-needed respite.
I'll be taking a gander at a nice, stodgy British film with seasoned and
respected actors like Q Grant and Tara Fitzgerald.
It's been ages upon ages since I've seen this one, so let me just take a quick
(36:16):
look at the synopsis and oh dear, I'm in trouble.
Sirens. Sirens is currently streaming on Peacock and is free with ads on Amazon
Prime. If you do watch it and want to talk about
any points, feel free to shoot me an email at steven at shelfcriticism.com.
Remember that's S-T-E-P-H-E-N. You can also find the podcast on Facebook
at Shelf Criticism and don't forget about my other podcast,
(36:38):
Real Lit, where I'm joined by my colleague, The Peerless McKenzie.
You can find that just about anywhere you get your podcast fixed as well as our
official website, reallitpodcast.com and social media
at Real Lit Podcast. Remember that's R-E-E-L,
like a film reel. So with all that said and going over time,
which I did not expect to do with this film, until next time
(37:01):
DVD aficionados, remember to treat yourself to a little shelf indulgence
of your own. Amelia, sing-a-zone.
Shelf Criticism is an Owls of Palace production.
(37:23):
This podcast is in no way connected with the educational institutions the host
is employed by. The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the host and
do not necessarily reflect the views of any other organization with which he is
affiliated. Most images displayed are public domain.
Images and stills from films, descriptions of scenes and passages from
books are used for educational and critical purposes
(37:44):
and not for profit and therefore fall under the terms of fair use.
Listen to me. Promise me that you're not going to do anything.
(38:05):
I got you. It's better if nobody traded. You don't know anything.
What are you talking about? I'll take care of it. I don't want you to take care of any-
John, do me a favor. I'm being serious with you. I know, I know.
Smart. You're smart. No, I'm not. I'm being honest with you. I don't want
anything to happen to me. Me neither.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.