Happy Endings

I rented this film out of brotherly love, and it actually starts with a very different act of brotherly love as well...but not the good kind. I didn't even realize this was the director of The Opposite of Sex until discussing this with a friend.

Anyways, I don't find this to be a comedy, as it is as bemusing as it is amusing. Roos does give a handful of actors chances to go over the top, which works while also giving this a sort of sitcom feel. At the same time, touching upon people's need to have some dirt, or special secret in their lives and using the old movie-in-a-movie trick makes certain this isn't a film that was knocked out as poorly as Mamie (often pronounced Mommy it seemed to me) was knocked up.

The film is a celebration of quirkiness, which thanks to avoiding clichés works okay for me. It actually drew my wife in to watching it with its sort of soap operatic maneuvers. Although the series of false endings, then more denouement, then another false ending she found maddening. She also was distracted by the text sidebars that give us an omnipotent wink as to what is going on, and in some cases completely undercut the dramatic tension going on. Just don't watch the film with subtitles on at the same time...

The idea of the quest for the lost son, as opposed to lost father also was interesting, but this film likes its characters more than its themes I suspect. Again, a sort of soap opera strength.

I recognized but could not place Jesse Bradford here, from his recurring stint on West Wing as a scion of political privilege. And same was true for Bobby Cannavale even goofier here than in the "Station Agent" Really the whole cast seemed to embrace their outlandish characters and I think that's this film's forte. Kind of like watching some nice juggling, and all the balls fall in place ultimately.

6/10

Writer/director Don Loos has the corner on bizarre, wiggly, frustrating, veritas-infused glimpses at the absurdity of human 'communications/relationships' happening right now. His previous writings (some with direction credits) include 'The Opposite of Sex', 'Boys on the Side', 'Love Field', and 'Bounce', all of which explore the desperate need for regular people to find just a hint that their time on the planet makes a difference - at least in some small way despite their larger delusions. His characters are quirky, both bigger than life and pathetically dreary, and cross the lines of the expected borders of types: Roos is one of the few directors who consistently plays the 'minority groups' (gays, lesbians, African Americans, Hispanics, etc) as simply other characters on the playing field of life. And for that he deserves some respect from everyone.

HAPPY ENDINGS (suggestively referring to the ad promise found in masseur/masseuse in the Massage Available columns of magazines and some newspapers!) follows the lives of multiple characters whose rather insignificant existences intersect in random ways that produce ten 'stories', all interrelated. Topics on the table include abortion, gay relationships, homophobia, parental dysfunction/child dysfunction, emotional manipulation, blackmail, film-making, artificial insemination, failed dreams, and more. Sound like ingredients for a comedy? Well, no, but in Roos' funky hands these incipient tragic topics weave through tragic trails that result in dark comedy outcomes. And that is the fun of the film.

Yes, there are problems with the movie that others have pointed out well. The gimmick of sidebars explaining what the script doesn't attack, visible on the half screen with scene change action, begin as clever and end up as annoying: if the script can't carry the issues without footnotes then there is just too much information for the viewer to digest. What keeps this movie afloat are the performances by Maggie Gyllenhaal, Lisa Kudrow, Jess Bradford, Bobby Carnavale, Tom Arnold, Steve Coogan, Laura Dern, Sarah Clarke, Jason Ritter, David Sutcliffe and Amanda Foreman. This is a talented cast and at times we feel they are actually overcoming the plot's weaknesses with their strong imagery.

Every Roos film feels like a work in progress, but there are enough fine lines of creativity that promise us someday they will all gel into an exceptional film. This one is too long and too choppy and too difficult to follow with all the visual interruptions of sidebar words to be his best work. Grady Harp

When a movie resorts to sidebars to explain the plot, especially as much as this one does, it implies that the writer has gotten lazy with his story development. A well-written movie could tie things together without the self-consciously cute little blurbs. I mean, the blurbs even tell the viewer right up front that this is a comedy -- in case you were wondering??? The saving grace is the acting. Tom Arnold, Lisa Kudrow and Maggie Gyllenhaal give great performances and really make their characters three dimensional. And each story unto itself is pretty interesting. The gay couple story was a bit trite and clichéd as far as the depiction of homosexual couples, but was still serviceable and interesting. I guess if I were to fix the story I would have strengthened the bonds between plot lines or I would have separated them completely. The tie-in between Otis and Mamie's stories was tenuous and tacked on. It's as though the writer were cheating a bit. Here we have some great stories and duologue. The acting is very good. But the writer didn't spend the extra time it would have taken to really craft the story into a cohesive whole, rather than resorting to the whole "indie" flick dodge of incomplete, fragmented storytelling passing as "art."

My wife rented this yesterday and we watched it last night. I'd never heard of it. After watching about 15 minutes of it, I thought "What in the world is this," because it was so frenetic. As written in the summary, there are several stories simultaneously being told, and it's kinda hard to keep everything straight. But, after awhile it starts to come together and you begin to pull for one or another of the characters.

I've never watched "Friends," so I haven't seen Lisa Kudrow much, but this was a good performance as a girl who alternates between spineless and fed up. I hadn't seen much of the rest of the cast before, so I can't comment. I also think it's interesting that Tom Arnold was first known for being married to Rosanne Barr, but it seems that lately he's gotten many various supporting roles, enough so that I find myself thinking: "Yeah, he was married to Rosanne whats-her-name?" Anyway, I liked this movie.

Yes, it's bizarre, quirky, odd, whatever you want to call it, but it ends well. It's one to watch. One more thing: it has many spots where there is a black sidebar with kind of "footnote" information. I found myself eventually pausing the DVD to read these things, because I didn't want to miss the music and a bit of action that might be taking place. I wish they would have just paused the movie at these points, and they were worthwhile explanations. Thumbs up!

Having tremendously enjoyed Don Roos' previous effort, the Opposite of Sex, I snapped up Happy Endings upon release of the DVD without knowing anything about it. Many of my friends didn't like the Opposite of Sex; when I asked them why, each confessed a dislike of Lisa Kudrow. When I noticed she was also in the cast of Happy Endings, and in fact plays one of the main characters, I figured I'd better shut up about mentioning my latest acquisition to some of those friends until I had a chance to watch it. Watch it I did, and I have nothing but good things to report. Like the Opposite of Sex, Happy Endings revolves around several gay and straight characters, with enough attention paid to both, thus ensuring that the film could appeal to a mixed audience. There is where all similarities end. While Opposite of Sex had a relatively up-front and focused plot, Happy Endings manages to juggle several plots and subplots all at once. Each of the characters lives touch other characters lives in a style not unlike that of director Robert Altman. In fact, I kept thinking that the pacing and juggling of the subplots was somewhat similar to Short Cuts, or even Crash (in the way that Crash was also compared to Altman's style). Keeping everyone sorted out in my mind became something of a chore, but I generally like films that make you think and keep you on your toes. There were one or two surprises, including several totally unexpected plot twists, and that's always good too. As a comedy I didn't laugh so much as I smiled, and I asked myself more than once, "I wonder what will happen next". As the end credits were rolling I decided I enjoyed my visit with these people, and could easily have managed to sit though even more. How often do you hear that about a movie that runs over two hours?

The cast, which includes Tom Arnold, Jason Ritter and Jesse Bradford give even and professional performances throughout. It worked in a way that good ensemble pieces always work; that is, it would be difficult to single out any one member of the cast, as they worked off each other in such a way that no one could expect all the notices. Another good thing, in my book. I am definitely going to suggest to my friends that they give Don Roos another shot, Lisa Kudrow and all. I can certainly think of worse ways to spend a couple of hours.