It's a Monday night. I've just finished a long day at work. All I
want is a light, fluffy rom-com to relax to. Something that won't
require too much brain power. I came across What If on Amazon Prime and
threw it on without a thought, not really knowing what to expect. It's
hard to see Daniel Radcliffe as anything other than Harry Potter. I grew
up with this actor as an integral part of my childhood. He played the
Potter role so perfectly, and I have such a deep connection to those
movies. Hence I will always feel I have a certain kinship with him.
However since Potter, I am yet to be truly impressed by him in a movie.
This is sadly no exception, yet he definitely stands head and shoulders
above the rest of the cast.
What If explores the ambiguity of friendship and the notion of
whether a male and female can be intimate friends without anything more.
I like the idea, yet I don't think this film packs enough punch with
its characters to separate itself from the rom-com pack. The first half
an hour is by far my favourite part of this film. We are introduced to
Radcliffe's character Wallace as sort of a misfit, but at the same time
somebody who is clearly smart and personable. We also meet Chantry,
played by Zoe Kazan. They hit it off at a party, but after walking home
together we learn that Chantry has a long-term boyfriend called Ben.
Predictably, they keep running into each other and before long they
become close friends. I liked the first part of the film because it felt
more honest and innocent, if also very cliché. You sense the characters
doing their very best to learn about each other and be there for one
another as friends.
The funniest scene in the movie comes when Wallace meets boyfriend Ben for the first time. A disastrous scenario ensues when he gets knocked out of the window by Wallace, who makes the worst first impression of all time. After this scene, the love-triangle dynamic is in full effect, and this is when we run into major problems. Ben gets a job offer and has to move to Dublin, leaving Chantry alone in Toronto with Wallace. They continue to hang out and are predictably thrown into some awkward, boundary pushing situations that test their friendship to the maximum. We get the horribly clichéd skinny-dipping scene in which Chantry clearly crosses a major line, asking Wallace to look at her naked. Their friends Allan and Nicole prank them by stealing their clothes and leave them alone on the beach with nowhere to go, forcing them to share a sleeping bag in the nude. This upsets Chantry and she so she decides to visit Ben in Dublin. She finds him quite obviously about to cheat on her with drunken women before he eventually spots her. Her reaction to this is to just shrug it off and continue to trust him.
This is my main issue with Chantry's character; she has no moral foundation and clearly doesn't know what she wants. In fact, that applies to most of the characters in this movie. All of them are just being led by desire, with no consideration for integrity or moral values. I'm afraid that this saps any emotional charge out of the film for me, and leads me to dislike most of the characters, especially Chantry. There is no real struggle to latch onto either, as both of the central characters both have good jobs and great social lives. The surrounding cast just got on my nerves for most of the film, none more so than Chantry's twin sister, who does nothing but insult Wallace and gossip about crap the entire film. Wallace's best friend Allan is slightly more tolerable and had a few funny lines, but I still found him insufferable by the end of the movie. Radcliffe is really the only thing that held this film together in any way. His dialogue was quite interesting and at least you felt he really cared for Chantry.
But quite honestly, What If left me wanting a lot more in every department. I know I should try and see this movie in the context of the rom-com genre, but I think a good rom-com should do a better job at being comic and playful than this does. Above all, the viewer must care at least a little bit about the characters. But really? Am I supposed to feel happy for Wallace and Chantry at the end of the film because they finally hook up? Lets not forget that she is still cheating on Ben at this point.
At the end of the day, this is an OK romantic comedy. The highlights were Radcliffe's acting and few moments that made me grin or chuckle. The downsides were plentiful, but above all Zoe Kazan's tedious portrayal of Chantry and a horribly annoying back up cast. I can how this film might appeal to some, but to me it was just too clichéd and lacked a soul.
Acting: 45
Narrative: 40
Visuals: 45
Music: 60
Overall: 47/100
The funniest scene in the movie comes when Wallace meets boyfriend Ben for the first time. A disastrous scenario ensues when he gets knocked out of the window by Wallace, who makes the worst first impression of all time. After this scene, the love-triangle dynamic is in full effect, and this is when we run into major problems. Ben gets a job offer and has to move to Dublin, leaving Chantry alone in Toronto with Wallace. They continue to hang out and are predictably thrown into some awkward, boundary pushing situations that test their friendship to the maximum. We get the horribly clichéd skinny-dipping scene in which Chantry clearly crosses a major line, asking Wallace to look at her naked. Their friends Allan and Nicole prank them by stealing their clothes and leave them alone on the beach with nowhere to go, forcing them to share a sleeping bag in the nude. This upsets Chantry and she so she decides to visit Ben in Dublin. She finds him quite obviously about to cheat on her with drunken women before he eventually spots her. Her reaction to this is to just shrug it off and continue to trust him.
This is my main issue with Chantry's character; she has no moral foundation and clearly doesn't know what she wants. In fact, that applies to most of the characters in this movie. All of them are just being led by desire, with no consideration for integrity or moral values. I'm afraid that this saps any emotional charge out of the film for me, and leads me to dislike most of the characters, especially Chantry. There is no real struggle to latch onto either, as both of the central characters both have good jobs and great social lives. The surrounding cast just got on my nerves for most of the film, none more so than Chantry's twin sister, who does nothing but insult Wallace and gossip about crap the entire film. Wallace's best friend Allan is slightly more tolerable and had a few funny lines, but I still found him insufferable by the end of the movie. Radcliffe is really the only thing that held this film together in any way. His dialogue was quite interesting and at least you felt he really cared for Chantry.
But quite honestly, What If left me wanting a lot more in every department. I know I should try and see this movie in the context of the rom-com genre, but I think a good rom-com should do a better job at being comic and playful than this does. Above all, the viewer must care at least a little bit about the characters. But really? Am I supposed to feel happy for Wallace and Chantry at the end of the film because they finally hook up? Lets not forget that she is still cheating on Ben at this point.
At the end of the day, this is an OK romantic comedy. The highlights were Radcliffe's acting and few moments that made me grin or chuckle. The downsides were plentiful, but above all Zoe Kazan's tedious portrayal of Chantry and a horribly annoying back up cast. I can how this film might appeal to some, but to me it was just too clichéd and lacked a soul.
Acting: 45
Narrative: 40
Visuals: 45
Music: 60
Overall: 47/100
No comments:
Post a Comment