Alex & Emma (2003)

Cynthia Fuchs

It is Alex's fantasy into which the film and Emma's seeming interests devolve.

Alex & Emma

Director: Rob Reiner
Cast: Kate Hudson, Luke Wilson, Sophie Marceau, David Paymer, Chino XL
MPAA rating: R
Studio: Warner Bros.
First date: 2003
US Release Date: 2003-06-20

Self-described "brilliant novelist" Alex (Luke Wilson) has writer's block. When he first appears in Alex & Emma, he's seated in his Boston loft apartment, plinking out a scant few words on his laptop: "Adam Shipley," he plinks, "was an ordinary man." Or no. For poor Adam, life was "confusing." And with that, Alex's erupts, as a pair of big-necked, thick-accented goons ostensibly representing the "Cuban Mafia" (one played by hiphop artist Chino XL, the other by Lobo Sebastian) arrive on his doorstep and demand payment.

These goons serve as "motivation," simple and plain. And, like a lot of media thugs, they appear to be inspired by the Vanilla Ice story wherein Suge Knight dangles him from his feet from a balcony. And so, they do exactly this to Alex, who in turn does what he must: he begs for his life, promising to get them their money -- $100,000 -- in 30 days, by completing his new manuscript and being paid by his publisher (Rob Reiner). The goons, being goons, proceed to do exactly what makes the least sense if they want to get their money: they burn his laptop.

After all this incoherent (and mostly unpredictable) excitement in its first six minutes, Reiner's romantic comedy descends almost immediately into foreseeable tedium. Reportedly inspired by Dostoevsky's autobiographical short story, "The Gambler," the film uses Alex's dog-track losses and thugs a-looming as ludicrous means to get him to hire a stenographer, to take his dictated book. This would be Emma (Kate Hudson in pert, courtroom-ready suits and strangely dreary hair), who believes she's been assigned by her agency to service a law firm. Peering at the mussy apartment from the door, she throws back her shoulders and declares, "This doesn't look like a law office. It doesn't even look like a nice place to live." Hmmmph: she might as well be stamping her little foot.

Uncowed by such display of spleen, Alex woos his would-be savior by fainting dead away at her feet. In another movie, this might have been a character trait that was going somewhere; in this one, he faints, wakes up, and that's the end of it. Even more annoying, Emma takes it as a sign that this wayward boy needs looking after. She doesn't say as much, but neither is there a decent explanation for why she decides to take this preposterous job. And gee, as soon as she threatens to leave, his muse smiles down on him. So, he begins: "Adam Shipley had given up on love. Art was to be his mistress..."

The rest of Alex & Emma is more or less Alex's wholly un-artful and hackneyed novel, as he tells it and Emma challenges it or encourages it (sometimes both at the same time). It's not quite the literary conceit that it sounds: no clever insinuations or metaphors here. What you see is pretty much what you get: Alex plays his own idealized writer hero, Adam, circa 1924. He wears Gatsby-ish white suits and works on some made-up Euro island as a tutor for the two personality-less children of the lovely Polina (Sophie Marceau), she of the "ample bosom" and lightweight summer dresses. In need of funds in order to maintain her customary life of leisure, Polina is engaged to the wealthy and awkwardly mustachioed John Shaw (David Paymer). He would be what they call an "obstacle" in the writing biz. And so, the talented David Paymer is relegated to speaking about four lines all told.

The film cuts back and forth between the fictional island and the nonfictional apartment, as Emma initially objects to Alex's careless objectification of his leading lady (all easy target stuff). Gradually -- very too gradually, as this movie lasts about 40 minutes longer than it needs to -- she becomes immersed in the tale, worrying that Alex is taking advantage of Polina, and then worrying that she's not the right woman for him when he introduces Polina's au pair. Variously named Ylva, Elsa, Eldora, and Anna (and played by Hudson each time), because Alex can't figure out which "nationality" (or hairstyle) grants her the most "edge," the au pair is by turns Swedish, German, Spanish -- indicated by accents that all sound like they've been ground through lawnmowers -- and finally, a charming Yank with a flapper's bob. Aha, Anna has Emma's drab hair color and sweet smile, indicating that she is the perfect match for Adam, or Alex, or someone.

The decision for Adam takes the form of Polina the sex goddess or Emma the amiable soul mate, this last indicated by the most egregious montage, where they walk through the park, peruse book vendors, ride a boat on the river, all under a Norah Jones track -- it's almost enough to make you want to return to the novel, which is by now painfully ridiculous). Alex, being the ignorant sort that he is, needs some prodding and even a little crisis before he can make the right choice, for his protagonist and for himself. Emma, being the enabling sort that she is, earnestly coaxes his self-discovery, all the while designing to remake him in the image she prefers. Or rather, the image he would prefer she prefers. For it is his fantasy, of course, into which the film and Emma's seeming interests devolve.

With a script credited to Jeremy Leven (The Legend of Bagger Vance) and polished by Reiner, Alex & Emma takes writer's block as a point of departure. But unlike the more compelling recent fantasies spun from such a beginning -- say, Barton Fink or Adaptation -- it dawdles and dwindles, eventually ending up where it starts: blocked.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.