Romance or Bromance: “This Means War”, A Surprising Action Romantic Comedy Film
Men … go see the romantic comedy This means war.
You read it correctly, I said “mens “.
At the moment, I can hardly remember a film that combines romantic comedy and action with such balance and style; it is both a “boy’s movie” and a “girl’s movie.”
The premise is the standard romantic triangle: two “FDR” friends (Chris Pine, Star Trek, smoking aces) and “Tuck” (Tom Hardy, Star Trek: Nemesis, Origin, Warriors, the next The dark knight rises) vying for the affection of the same girl (Reese Witherspoon). The twist here is that they happen to be CIA field agents.
Chris Pine transplants his character of “Captain Kirk” to modern Earth with the character of “FDR Foster” (with a couple of tongue-in-cheek references to the iconic character Pine has inherited, including his penchant for “intergalactic relationships”). He infuses his character with a confluence of Kirk and Harrison Ford’s unbridled “Han Solo” charm, but Pine plays it with a bit of caution. Hardy’s “Tuck” is the more “sensitive” of the two, but he has enough macho arrogance to balance it. And in one scene in particular, he does a throwaway line that he gave Pine at the beginning of the climax especially poignant. He’s a very talented actor, and it’s surprising that someone who could play sociopath Charles Bronson could juggle a role like this. In their interactions, Pine and Hardy have wonderful chemistry together. It’s easy to believe that these two have practically been brothers when you first meet them on screen. Comedy comes primarily from his ability to sync comedy along with his macho skill play. Their affability makes up for the inherent discomfort one would get if one sat and pondered the tactics they use to sabotage the other and hint at the graces of their target (misuse of government funds and equipment is an understatement here).
As the object of their mutual desire, this movie is an interesting choice for Witherspoon. You may have a higher turnover, but your story takes a back seat to that of your co-stars. However, he makes the most of what he has and stands his ground. She defaults to the brave person she’s managed to cultivate throughout her career, but this time, refreshingly absent, it’s the smug self-awareness that nuanced her. She is delightfully lacking in shyness and gives the most natural acting she’s had in quite some time. His “Lauren Scott” is competent, self-assured and a bit neurotic, but none of these are played as stereotypes. Complementing her performance is Chelsea Handler. While she is not a revelation, as Tom Arnold was in True Lies so many years ago, his character is surprisingly nuanced. His trademark delivery is in evidence, but his personality is sublimated to suit the performance, which is marked with a surprisingly realistic sensibility. Rosemary Harris has little more than a cameo in her role as Nana Foster, but she brings far more value than “Aunt May” in the Spiderman films. It’s easy to see where FDR got that aspect of his personality from.
Sadly, the resolution of the love triangle is practically telegraphed at the beginning of the film. If you have seen the original Star Wars trilogy, then you will know how things will end. In this case, however, the fun is really in the journey, not the destination.
As a director, McG has been criticized for being all dazzling and having very little, if any, substance. However, with each subsequent outing, his films, while entertaining on the surface, begin to carry a little more emotional weight. An important theme in his films (and yes, this includes the “Charlie’s Angels” franchise) is the importance of family relationships. This movie shows the importance of not only a satisfying romantic relationship, but also a filial bond. As mentioned above, the plot of the “bromance” overshadows the romantic one. By portraying agents as adversaries, the audience is addressed exactly why they need each other. They complement each other in a way that only true companions can. However, it also shows why these men would chase the same girl and why she would be divided between the two of them. Quite possibly, despite the ridiculousness of the proceedings, this may be McG’s most grown-up / mature film to date.
His movie pacing is mostly balanced. The quiet moments are almost as gripping as the comedic ones, which are fast and furious and really funny. Where McG drops the proverbial ball is with his treatment of Til Schweiger as “Heinrich,” the film’s ostensible antagonist in the sense that his plan for revenge is less than a “C” plot. The public never feels any danger because his character is hardly present; stands out more for its absence. By the time she makes her move against the agents at war, she almost feels like a Deus Ex machina afterthought. It’s also appalling to have an actress of the caliber of Angela Bassett and give her what amounts to maybe two minutes of screen time as an actress. Starskey and hutch desk supervisor stereotype; an expository plot device and little else. It seems the only direction he gave her was “do what you did in Green Lantern, but more angry. “The movie could have gone well without her, which is more of an indictment of the script than Bassett’s pigeonhole talent.
This means war it’s an almost perfect balance of what Hollywood looks for in its films: a film that satisfies both genres. At the time of this writing, she is lost in the confusion of other more-budgeted and publicized films and that is to her detriment. Despite its minor flaws, it is a wonderfully executed film that is sure to please both genders and offers laughs and action.