This 'License' is Dead
Written: Jul 05 '07 (Updated Jul 05 '07)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: John Krasinski
Cons: Everything else.
The Bottom Line: License to Wed is an awful romantic comedy that has no romance and very little comedy.
|
|
|
| briankrakow's Full Review: License to Wed |
Sometimes you’re watching a movie and something happens that makes so little sense that you wish the director or screenwriter or anyone involved with the film were nearby so you could shake them and ask what the hell they were thinking. In Ken Kwapis’ License to Wed, this happened on at least a dozen occasions. The film’s inability to maintain any logical consistency is remarkable considering the relatively simple story. This isn’t a labyrinthine David Lynch plot after all. This wouldn’t be such a problem if the film were funny, but despite a handful (for someone with small hands) of amusing moments, this miserable film is uncomfortable and unintentionally creepy for a variety of reasons.
License to Wed focuses on the newly engaged Ben (John Krasinski) and Sadie (Mandy Moore) who are forced (well Sadie forces Ben, but we’ll get to that later) into taking a marriage preparation course so they can get married at her family church. The course is run by Rev. Frank (Robin Williams), who we can tell is an oddball preacher because he teaches children the Ten Commandments utilizing a game show format. He puts Ben and Sadie through a series of tests designed to help them get to know each other better and apparently this will prepare them for a successful marriage, but all it does is seem to drive them apart.
This silly high concept premise suffers from a very major flaw. There is no reason for us to believe that reasonable adults would willingly subject themselves to this nonsense. Some of the “hilarious” things that they have to do include taking care of robot babies, driving blindfolded, or talk openly about sex with him in the room. The entire idea of the Robin Williams character is fatally flawed and downright disturbing. In the game show sequence, they have him delivering sexual double entendres for some of the commandments. Then he spends the rest of the film with a young boy (Josh Flitter, in a performance so annoying that it merits a Razzie nomination) who helps him out with his schemes. At no point is the boy’s parental situation explained and he performs tasks for the reverend at all hours of the night. In the wake of major church abuse scandals that are still fairly recent, the filmmakers here seem to not have any sense of perspective.
License to Wed marks John Krasinski’s first leading role after doing three seasons of duty on the splendid TV comedy The Office. His work there is some of the best on television and some of that does carry over to this film. Krasinski’s trademark on that show are offbeat facial reactions to the uncomfortable actions of other characters. That asset is on display here, but at times you wonder if he’s reacting in character to Reverend Frank’s actions or if he’s really reacting to the horrible film he’s found himself in. He does have an ingratiating charm that makes him the only character worth rooting for in the film. Thanks to Krasinski, it’s easy to identify with Ben’s exasperated anger at the ridiculous antics of those around him.
On the other hand, Mandy Moore is unable to rise above her blandly written character. She does nothing to make us understand why Ben would put himself through all of this to marry her. The way Sadie is written certainly does not help. At every single moment where Ben tries to explain that he’s uncomfortable with something Rev. Frank is making them do, she completely ignores him, essentially telling him to shut up and do it. The very worst moment is when Rev. Frank has them do a trust test where Sadie drives blindfolded while Ben is supposed to give her directions from the back seat. Ben clearly does not want to do this, but Sadie yells at him for it, calling him a quitter. This is not rational behavior from any adult. If not wanting to die in a stupid car accident, not to mention potentially kill innocent bystanders, makes me a quitter then sign me up. Ben clearly agrees as would most sane people, but the way the scene is played out, the view of the film is that he’s a jerk. This is the main scene where I would like to shake Kwapis and have him explain to me how that makes any sense.
There are traces of a dark comedy in here. Just changing the tone of the movie and the events of the 3rd act and you could have a pretty interesting film about a nice guy who unfortunately falls for a selfish woman who has a nasty family and creepy pastor. In fact, there are so many disturbing moments that I wonder if the screenplay was originally written as a dark comedy and later changed by the studio. It’s clearly not what Kwapis is going for here. The film features bright colors all the way through and a final sappy romantic gesture that is stolen straight from an episode of Beverly Hills, 90210. Of course, I’m not sure which is more embarrassing; that this film stole from a scene in that show or that I remember the scene in question.
At the end, we’re expected to believe that what the Reverend has done is a good thing, but there is nary a moment in the entire film that supports that. We’re also supposed to buy that Ben loves Sadie, but the five minutes of courtship that we see at the beginning of the film do nothing to make the audience understand that. On top of that, Sadie’s actions in this story are so inexcusable that they would have destroyed even the most solid of relationships. Sadie should be single for the rest of her life and Rev. Frank deserves to be in jail. As for Ben, well I hear there’s a pretty cool receptionist in Scranton that would be perfect for him.
Recommended:
No
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
briankrakow
|
|
Member: Larry McGillicuddy
Location: Atlanta, GA
Reviews written: 114
Trusted by: 59 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.