Las leyes de atracción

Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant and Doris Day may have made better screwball comedies, but this one just about works, by downplaying punchlines and taking obvious idiocies as read, such as the leads' addictions to sweeties and their penchant for falling through doors or knocking things over. But with these traits, how is it their apartments are immaculate? A directorial faux-pas here.

Julianne Moore is wonderful as usual, playing the rather uptight divorce lawyer, impressed despite herself with Brosnan's physical attractions. She is a mistress of the personality contrasts: sweet smile against dagger-drawn eyes; disconcerted reactions with suave sophistication; professional aplomb in the courtroom, but slobbing out in front of the TV. She is not only determined to resist Brosnan but successfully compete against him, while her mother, brilliantly played by Frances Fisher, is determined to persuade her to accept his overtures. Frances Fisher almost steals the film with her over-the-top, much-married, society fashion character, distinctly contrasting with Julianne Moore's more stuffy persona (reminiscences of Edina and Saffy in Absolutely Fabulous?).

I cringed at the scenes in Ireland, but this film does not pretend to be anything other than a sweet-thing romantic comedy of deliberate game-playing. It doesn't go for stand-up jokes, but just bowls along happily in its overdose of sugar. Moore is marvelous in serious drama (The Hours and Far From Heaven) but is proving equally at home with zany comedy (see also Cookie's Fortune). Brosnan relies on his handsome looks to see him through any part, but his comedy timing is as excellent as Moore's. The characters' common clumsiness is as well-timed as anything Doris Day did in That Touch Of Mink, or Cary Grant in Monkey Business. Given that Brosnan and Moore are more often seen in adventure or drama, an outing into comedy does not go amiss and gives us a chance to see them do something different. I wasn't sure of the film to begin with, but it grew on me. As long as it is accepted as a light and frothy entertainment, with no other purpose than whiling away a Sunday afternoon in front of the fire with a box of chocolates, it's a fine movie. Does Frances Fisher ever play any other character than someone's mother?

This movie reminds me of the romantic screwball comedies from the 30's, 40's and 50's. The movie succeeds in following the humor, witty dialogs and great pace witch made the romantic comedies of old so great. That is, until the ending. The entire ending is ruined, copy-pasted from every other average romantic comedy today (they split up, the guilty one realizes his/her fault and runs to his/her lover and spills his/her guts out... and they live happily ever after). It is not the director's fault, he even tried his best to make the ending not so sleazy (aka the excellent wedding scene). Pierce Brosnan is great, in some scenes even better then Moore, reminds me of Cary Grant, James Stewart in their best work (Bringing up Baby, The Philadelphia Story...). Brosnan is actually becoming a much better actor than he was 6-7 years before. Julianne Moore is, as always, excellent. The supporting is actually also great, from Sheen, Posey, Fisher, Dunn to the locals in the Irish village. All in all a great screwball comedy which has not been made in years, if the ending were any better...

Audrey Woods (Julianne Moore) and Daniel Rafferty (Pierce Brosnan) are New Yorks finest divorce attorneys, but when celebrity Couple (Parker Posey and Michael Sheen) raise the stakes in their divorce, Audrey and Daniel set out to make their cases and end up getting hitched themselves. For the sake of their reputations they must pretend that they are really in love.

Julianne Moore and Pierce Brosnan have a very good on-screen chemistry, and they are helped by some nice direction and a good script; there's plenty of laughs in this romantic comedy, but it's not a real tearjerker like some others in the genre.

7/10 A fine effort

I believe 'Laws of Attraction' is the only movie I've ever seen which I greatly preferred the 'alternate scenes and subplots' to what the producers chose to present. The plot involves way too little law. Most of the time when either Brosnan or Lewis winds, it's because of some piece of information the other lawyer should have known. The romance is weak, though not in the alternate scenes, especially those short ones which involves a former romance between Brosnan and the judge's sister.

Had 'Laws of Attraction' incorporated the alternate scenes and subplots, it would be deeper, grittier and funnier, well worthy of a '7'. However, as presented, 'Laws of Attraction' is good only for a weak '6', primarily due to the charms of Pierce Brosnan.

You ever watch a movie that under normal circumstances you'd think was great and wonderful, but there is something about the movie that keeps you from fully enjoying it? It gets sort of stuck between being great and being good, so ends up in neither place, and you end up liking but not loving the movie. Ultimately the movie falls into abyss of "almost", and you very quickly forget it altogether.

Such is the curse of Laws of Attraction, a really good movie that's just sort of there. Half way into the movie I was wondering to myself why I wasn't connecting more with the movie since its funny, well acted, and very charming in all of the right ways. Somehow despite being able to see the quality I stopped caring what happened.

Can I recommend this romantic comedy about lawyers in love? Yes, its sweet and light and everything a good romantic comedy should be except memorable.

Rent it or wait for cable, but give it shot.

7 out of 10.