Holiday
Bah. Humbug
Every year there's some horrible Rom-Com I'm forced to endure by some female or other. I find this form repellent in the extreme, and after 2 hours of cloying niceness I go looking for a puppy to kick. I was able to avoid Love Actually in the cinema by the simple dint of sending the chick to get the pop-corn while I bought tickets to Master and Commander. The Subterfuge was only dicovered when the movie actually started. This year it is The Holiday. I thought Love actually was bad, but it had the saving grace of a few good gags and Bill Nighy.
This horrible flick is even more emotionally pornographic than Love Actually, with which it shares several features but none of the good points. Men are judged in this genre only on their fidelity - no other features matter. None of the men had any character depth and were simply things for girls to coo over just in porn women are somthing for men to have sex with. When Jude Law's character admitted to bursting into tears all the time, I could hear the women in the audience go "ahhh". I was nearly sick, but I was even more disgusted with the bit when Cameron Diaz's character Amanda, met Jude Law's children - a revoltingly angelic brace of girls - and she asked him was he D.I.V.O.R.C.E.D. He replied W.I.D.O.W.E.R.
Now this is horribly manipulative of female pleasure centres. Jude Law is a good looking man. His character, Graham is lovably rougueish at first - the ideal holiday fuck (sorry women call these 'romances') - but is also good with children. Now this leaves the problem of demonstrating his fidelity. Remember this is the only charicteristic by which male characters in Rom-Coms are judged. If he's got children, there's another woman with whom he fell out - and that can't be allowed. So the writer cheerfully kills the ex off, which has the added advantage of leaving the man pleasingly vulnerable. This is the only possible justification in Rom-Com land for males to have unattached sex. Women can do it whenever they like because it is 'empowering' or something.
So... The American bit of skirt goes to the pub and gets pissed. Now I don't know how many yanks you've taken on a session, but bless them, they can't drink and yet no mention is made of Amanda spending the evening driving the porcelain bus with Graham holding her hair back, which would be the inevitable result of an american being introduced to British boozing. She gets pissed, but the sole reason is to enable Graham to say something along the lines of "I don't take advantage of pissed girls". Ahhhhh. It's alright for Amanda to take advantage of his inebriation when they first meet though.
Other than this box-ticking excersise, there's no dialogue. There are plenty of montages of people laughing and kissing to music, because creating any character depth takes talent and hard work from the writer, and why bother when you're writing porn for women? No. Simple skipping about in some picture-postcard piece of Jane Austin England with some soft strings in the background will do all the work of an actual script.
Meanwhile in America, the other pair march, with the directness of a panzer division into love with each other via battles with unfaithful exes, which allow them both to confront their emotional demons and "self-respect issues". The sub-plot of getting a nice old codger to have some self respect and go to his benefit concert (quickly arranged on christmas eve?) again is just dull.
So there we are. The plot moves along its two paths, both using the same tricks to make the men attractive and vulnerable and the women stong and empowered, towards the inevitable double date at the end, where the only question which I couldn't answer within the first five minutes was "whose house will it be in?" It's in Graham's - which was inevitable, I suppose as soon as the brats made their appearance.
Cue more soft srings and inexplicable laughter, and they all live happily ever after. Yeurrregh.












