hugh grant’s last two films have him playing a caricature of some pathetic figure in western society. in american dreamz it was the ratings-hungry host of a show modeled after american idol. in this film it’s the ubiquitous pop star has-been. at what point, though, is grant going to become a mockery in choosing these roles? i don’t really know, but i’ve never liked the guy so two films is enough to do it for me. that’s all i’ll say about him for now. actually, one last thing…hugh, please button your shirt, you’re not david carradine or james caan, and this isn’t the 1970s.
this film reminded me most of be cool because both were ultimately about attempts to change pop music by being a part of it. in other words, in the end, the film is highly unbelievable.
the “love” between barrymore and grant isn’t believable, but it is similar to the love depicted in every other crappy hollywood film. no real change occurs on the part of the characters, in spite of what the lyrics to grant’s love song might have you believe. i didn’t mind barrymore’s performance, but i thought the writing and slowly paced direction were poor. this is what it comes down to: the film was funny at times and i liked the satirical aspects of it, but the writing of the characters was formulaic and simple.Watched in theater