Love Actually (2003)

Too many characters are all around... 

Though often critically derided Love Actually is an unusually constructed mainstream film. Richard Curtis originally tried to write two screenplays intended as separate films- one about a new Prime Minister, the other about a writer. Instead, he combined them and added a number of other characters to create a loosely linked anthology. It’s something of a bold gambit to ask an audience to follow so many different stories and while it does mean some remain underdeveloped, others have their moments. It’s only near the end that we realise there are connections between all the characters, some quite tenuous, and a wider theme than we might think the title suggests. In the end there is too much content - to properly fulfil the stories it needs to be Avatar length!

Events are set in 2003 albeit in that just to the left of reality location we might call Curtisland. Most of these characters occupy large houses and apartments doing highly paid jobs that don’t seem to involve much actual work. Over the course of several weeks before Xmas their lives change in different ways, some dramatic, some comedic, others more low key but meaningful. There’s a lot of content though Curtis largely keeps the stories separate save for glimpses of other characters – especially the Pime Minister and the ageing pop star- on tv sets in the background. The unevenness of these tales means the film sometimes struggles to flow and just when you’re getting interested in one story we shift to one in which you are less invested. The other aspect that comes over more so nowadays is how relatively little agency some of the female characters have; this is a  mostly male driven series of plots in which the women are off screen when not needed and often presented as little more than objects.

For me far and away the best strand involves writer Jamie (Colin Firth) who after discovering an affair between his wife and brother retreats to a French cottage (as you do when life gets difficult!) to write. He employs a Portuguese housekeeper Aurelia (Lucia Moniz) though neither can speak a mutual language. There are some misunderstandings- here the subtitles amuse – but gradually they come to appreciate and ultimately develop feelings for each other even though they can’t really express them. This relies very much on the physical skills of the actors ; Lucia Moniz in particular is able to emote a lot as things develop. The segment ends with one of those sequences viewers find either uplifting or sickly; depending on whether you like happy endings. For me it’s the former. I  do think this works because of the work the actors have put in earlier and the ensemble of villagers who accompany Jamie's walk through the village adds a characterful air. Here, both of them do feel the same and while it is the male who makes the gesture, at least he has made an effort to learn her language and not brought any cue cards!

Played by Emma Thompson, Karen features in my second favourite storyline whose implications may be seismic for the character but which plays out with surprising subtlety thanks to a perfectly calibrated performance. Karen is married to Harry (Alan Rickman), who is the boss of a design agency and they have two kids. He has one of those slightly cliched movie secretaries who flirts with him constantly though as she is played by Heike Makatsch who has such a strong on screen presence the character works far better than you’d expect. Anyway, the crux of this story involves Karen thinking Harry has bought her an expensive present when it turns out its not for her. Incidentally a scene as Harry waits impatiently as Rowan Atkinson’s’ jewellery salesman indulges in time consuming, extravagant wrapping is the funniest thing in the whole film. What is Karen to do when she realises the expensive gift is symptomatic of a shift in her marriage? In such a scenario a character might do any number of things but here, though deeply upset (there’s a heartbreaking scene of her alone with the latter day, deeper voiced Joni Mitchell version of `Both Sides Now`) she swallows her pride, gets an apology and moves on. Yet in her face you know things will never be quite the same again. I did feel that there is tremendous potential for this as a wholly separate film. 

One strand that I’d actually forgotten about involves Sarah (Laura Linney) who works in Harry’s office and who harbours feelings for designer Karl. Yet when things finally start to happen, she cannot commit due to her brother who is in an unspecified mental unit and whose mood swings place demands on her time. Back in 2003, this didn’t register but since then events in my own life mean I know what it’s like to have to prioritise caring for a family member over your own personal commitments. The love here then is a different sort and I wish they’d given a little more time to this storyline.

The highest profile storyline at the time involved Hugh Grant who in those days had a monopoly on a certain type of well spoken English character. Here he’s a newly elected Prime Minister seemingly based on Tony Blair but called David whose initiation into Downing Streety includes an encounter with Natalie, a junior staff member whose nervousness and occasional expletives liven up the day. However when a slimy American President (seemingly prefiguring someone we know) arrives and makes a pass at her, David has her re assigned. Though he can be disparaging about his romcom days, the fact is that Grant was even then showing signs of a wider inclination to stray from his established persona. He actually makes a convincing modern day PM and the steel behind his speech about America is surely the kind of thing we’d love a real politician to make. Plus I like the idea that a Prime Minister would dance around Downing Street late at night! Martine McCutcheon is great fun as Natalie in a plotline that also needs more time especially for her.

Less convincing for me were two storylines that are probably some of the better known ones. Bill Nighy plays Billy Mack an ageing pop star making a festive comeback with a rendition of the old classic `Love is All Around` albeit with the revised title `Christmas Is All Around`. Having already inflicted the Wet Wet Wet version of this song on the nation nine years earlier from Four Weddings and A Funeral, it seems unfair of Richard Curtis to once again select this song for a prominent position. It is definitely a stretch to imagine the rakish, rough character of Billy as ever having been a popstar though the film declines to tell us much at all about his career. Usually reliably subtle, the actor’s performance here feels mis judged, not helped by the script which portrays him as sabotaging each promotional opportunity with boorish behaviour. I misinterpreted the resolution to this story back in the day due to it’s conclusion when Billy jibs a night at a celeb party to spend it with his manager Joe, the only person he `really loves`. Watching again I realised this isn’t a gay thing but a friendship thing though that doesn’t elevate what is an irritating part of the film whose central song is just as annoying as many a real Xmas single.

Then we have Andrew Lincoln’s lovelorn Mark who has watched his best friend  marry his long- term secret crush Juliet even arranging a rousing rendition of `All You Need is Love` at the ceremony.  Improbably when Juliet’s official wedding video comes out badly she asks if she can use some of the footage Mark shot- only soon to discover it is solely of her. Later, in the film’s best known visual Mark comes round to express his true feelings using cue cards presumably in an homage to Bob Dylan’s iconic 1965 promotional film for `Homesick Subterranean Blues`. Unfortunately, Mark’s cards are not up to that standard. This feels like the sort of thing that could only happen with a film character; even Curtis himself later admitted the scene was “weird.” If Kiera Knightly playing Juliet looks bewildered then its not surprising. How would someone just married react to that?. The intent behind this scene isn’t clear- what does Mark really expect would happen? Even sillier is afterwards, Mark walks away and says to himself “Enough, now”. I was imagining a bit later the police call round and he’s charged with harassment!

Elsewhere Liam Neeson plays the recently widowed stepfather of a young boy (Thomas Sangster) who is falling in love for the first time but despite fine performances it doesn’t quite spark because the recent bereavement is never properly addressed. Also the step father's advice never seems to go beyond encouraging the kid's idea that playing drums will be enough to impress the girl. Disappointingly she is impressed after all which seems no more enlightened a plot than the Mark one earlier.  In the film’s most embarrassing story Kris Marshall’s sandwich vendor Colin zips over to America on the notion that girls over there will be more attracted to him and it actually works albeit presented in the most sexist way. There’s a nice, slight story involving two stand ins for sex scenes in a film, who fall for each other through conversation alone which benefits from the juxtaposition between their actions and words.

I suspect the film will date not least because of the fact that many of these dilemmas could now be more easily resolved with smartphones and social media. Love Actually isn’t as good as it thinks it is- Curtis would nail a couple of these themes far better in About Time- yet neither is it as bad as some claim and it’s good moments are very good.