Une affaire de coeur

Audrey Woods is one of the best, nay, THE best divorce attorney in town. She has never lost a case and she is about to continue that winning streak with her latest case. When she meets her opposing counsel she has no reason to think that this scruffy man poses any threat to her. When he hands her her ass she steps up the competition and so begins a tense relationship in the courtroom. However outside of the court, the couple find a certain chemistry growing between them but surrounded by so many divorces and arguments how could anything good come of it?

Billed as a big name romantic comedy in the mould of sparky screwball romances of the forties and fifties this comedy at times is great fun but at others falls terribly flat. Given what it was basing itself of it should be no surprise that the first half is the best with energetic duelling between the two leads. Later on the script has to deliver a believable romance out of this and here is where it really falters. It suddenly becomes this twinkly affair in Ireland where love blooms, although it doesn't really although it might. It is a difficult hurdle to get over and the film doesn't really manage it and the final third is deeply unconvincing and hard to care about as it mugs its way towards the inevitable conclusion. It is strange that McKenna's script is so slick when it is in the "banter" stage but so heavy with syrup and silly cliché towards the end, almost like all the talent was put into the first half, leaving nothing for the latter stages.

Brosnan and Moore do try hard to make it work and mostly they succeed, but the material does gradually leave them out in the open. It helps that together they do manage an easy chemistry but later in the film they do struggle to convince with the more emotional side of the characters that exist outside of the fizz and snappy exchanges. Brosnan does well for the majority as he charms his way through but Moore can't seem to slide between the film's levels – she works with the snappy comedy stuff but when the emotional stuff comes she seems to drift between rom-com level acting and trying to go deeper. Support from Sheen, Posey, Fisher and a few others add some limited value around the edges but none can stop the script falling apart the longer it goes on.

Overall then what starts as a reasonable hark back to screwball romances gradually turns into an unconvincing, silly and sentimental affair that not even the big name stars can keep above the water. Not really worth a look for that reason.

OK, the heading was to grab your attention. Sarah Jessica Parker and her sex-mad cronies aren't (thankfully!) in this, but Pierce Brosnan and Julianne Moore are.

Every now and then, they make a lightweight comedy romance with English actor Hugh Grant, and someone like Jennifer Lopez or Sandra Bullock, and it falls apart because Grant can't act. Well, this one boldly casts Irish-born Bond actor Brosnan with stage-actress Moore.

It's not a "wet hanky" romance (as some reviewers were evidently expecting) but a tale of one-upmanship between two rival lawyers in Manhattan, both immediately likable characters, with romance, spy cameras and Irish dancing thrown in. Thank God there are no nasal Manhattan accents, people talking really fast about how much money they've made, women discussing sex in coffee houses, people whistling for taxis, scenes of the Statue of Liberty or Frank Sinatra music.

All in all, well worth renting.

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.

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