Abendessen mit Freunden

Having seen Donald Margulies' play when it opened in New York, I was interested in what Norman Jewison, the director, had done with it for the screen version. It helps that Mr. Margulies did his own adaptation, although, it appears to this viewer, the stage version was more satisfying. Not that there's anything wrong with the film, it's just that the cast in the play was far superior than these well intentioned actors we see in the movie. Mr. Margulies has tried to open his play, but it just doesn't go anywhere.

The basic premise, and a caveat to good friends, is to stay away from "fixing up" prospective marriage partners, as things in life are a bit more complicated than a good ending in a book, a play, a movie, or human relations.

Karen and Gabe are happily married. They conjure to arrange a meeting with Beth, a painter, and Tom, a lawyer. Basically, the idea of having mutual friends meet one another, might not be bad, but in reality things should be let alone and let nature takes its course. The bright idea back fires on Karen, who, upon hearing at the beginning of the film that her best friend, Beth, is divorcing Tom, is visibly upset. She feels betrayed by these two people she was instrumental in bringing together.

It's hard for both, Gabe and Karen, to think where they went wrong in their match making roles. They never take into consideration that Beth is totally wrong for Tom, and vice versa. The problem is that this couple don't think that Beth and Tom have found new partners in what appears to be a much solid relationships than what they had together. Karen and Gabe are crushed, but in reality, not everything is perfect in their own marriage. We get hints that yes, they are not completely happy, but they have decided to stay in the marriage out of decency and out of duty to their two boys, which is what Beth and Tom have failed to do. Call them old fashioned, but one has to give Karen and Gabe a lot of credit for at least trying to stay together as a family.

Andie MacDowell is Karen; she is a beautiful woman. In the movie, Ms. MacDowell appears a bit distant. She loved to bring people together and resents their friends separation. Ms. MacDowell's Karen comes across as a hard and judgmental person. Dennis Quaid tries hard to give Gabe warmth. Perhaps he comes across as the best of the four principals. Toni Collette's Beth is an enigma until her confrontation with Karen at the restaurant, then, we see a woman that is not shy in telling her best friend off as she embarks in a new relationship. Greg Kinnear is Tom. He is perhaps the weakest link in the quartet, as he is perhaps, not treated fairly by Karen, or Gabe.

The movie remains a bit theatrical, but Norman Jewison has done wonders with the material.

I haven't seen a movie this talky since "My Dinner with Andre." There the similarity between the two movies ends, though, because the dialogue in this movie is stilted, banal, predictable, and most of all, deadly dull. I don't think that either McDowell or Quaid were up to these roles; though I don't think the best actors imaginable could have breathed a lot of life into them. But these two come off almost as automatons, shifting emotional gears right on cue, just the way you expect them to. Like it's...it's...you know what it reminded me of? Tim Allen and Patricia Richardson in one of their "serious" moments in "Home Improvement." "OK, first 13 seconds of anger, then 22 seconds of self-defense, then a quick joke, 18 seconds of resolution, another joke, a hug, a kiss, and...CUT! And that's a wrap." I can only be glad that Quaid and McDowell don't talk to an avuncular next-door neighbor over a fence.

Clearly we're supposed to see the friends who are split up as the outwardly "perfect" people, charming, good-looking, bragging about the great sex with their new partners, rich, insisting that they're happy, but clearly we're supposed to identify with McDowell and Quaid, the introspective, homey couple who wonder if the fires have gone cold, but see, it's the very wondering that proves the fires *haven't* gone cold. I think.

And after all of the wrangling and the wrenching revelations and the anguished talk and the furrowed brows and the bitten lower lips, the whole thing is resolved by Quaid climbing on top of McDowell and the lights go out. All they needed was a little old-fashioned, introspective, homey sex. Not the wild, exotic, enjoyable kind, just the dull routine kind. In the picture-perfect bed in the picture-perfect bedroom of their picture-perfect cottage in picture-perfect Martha's Vineyard, with their picture-perfect sons asleep and all's well with the world. What seemed like acute marital appendicitis proved to be just a bit of gas.

Burp.

No character makes sense, everybody is wrong. Gabe and especially the ultra conservative Karen constantly temper in their friend's decisions, which are really none of their business (as if my best friend had a right to tell me who I should be with or what my goals and principles in life should be). Tom on the other hand is a self-righteous bastard who always thinks of himself as the victim. He loves talking about himself and doesn't accept anyone else's opinion. And Beth, well, she's just an unbelievably annoying person. I could see how anyone would want to leave her.

A movie about failed marriages and love should show how nobody is wrong and everybody is right. The thing is, none of the four characters here is believable and the dialog is painful at times. From the first time Tom and Beth meet it's hard to believe that the two of them are even attracted to each other. It's also hard to believe that somebody as far removed from reality as Karen is living on this planet and happily married.

Nope, the writers got it all wrong and not even the cast can save this movie. Sorry.

Dinner with Friends is somewhat unusual. Perhaps I''m just not as well-versed as I thought, but I haven't seen other movies about two couples that are friends, one splits up and its effect on the other couple.

This movie obviously originates as a stage play as it consists of four people sitting around and talking. As such, you can only make it so interesting, visually.

Because of this, the movie relies pretty much exclusively on the dialog and actors to make things interesting, and they mostly deliver. There were a few moments where the acting seemed very stage-style, for lack of a better term, but still decent overall.

I would caution you that you won't like this movie if you can't connect with the source material. It's a study of marriages and why some work and others don't as well as the effects of a divorce on friends. I would recommend it mostly to people who have had long- term relationships and/or are interested in them.

The opening scene of this film is very good, with equal parts humor, pathos, agony and sympathy. Problem is, it gets progressively worse as it goes along, and in the end, it just ... ends. It's as if the script writer(s) indiscriminately decided that it was a good place to write "The End" and say the hell with it.