Irrésistible Alfie

Jude Law takes the title role in this remake of the 1966 flick that was the follow-up hit that confirmed Michael Caine as a star. He's been an enduring one, still turning them out, as British actors do, whenever he's asked. 130 movies, with three n various stages of production. Good on him.

But we're talking about the 2004 production, and Jude Law here. Remakes of classics always start with a disadvantage. Just as Caine undoubtedly had to contend with comparisons to Terence Stamp's performance in the original stage production (Stamp turned down the movie, and helped talk Caine into it, impelled, no doubt, by a hope that a good paycheck would get Caine out of his apartment and into his own flat). So lets get to it: Law plays a playboy, not uncaring, but happy with his life of plenty of women and no attachments, who comes to realize that's not what he wants. Caine played the same facade and base.... and then layered them with the coldness he plays so well. Law thinks he has it all; Caine brought an amount of misogynistic disdain into the mix. That might not play in the 21st century, but it's a more nuanced and interesting performance, watching Alfie's change from a cheap villain into his own victim.

Still, this is a handsome production, reset in New York City for no particular reason, and offering a good time. It's not a classic, but it is a good film.

Why turn "Alfie" into a chick flick?

Maybe for those who mis-remembered the bright, scabrous, creative original. I'm finding that most reviewers are remembering it incorrectly, whereas I saw it for the first time the weekend before I saw this too-pretty make-over.

Most reviewers remember it as black-and-white, which it wasn't.

Most remember it as reflective of the Swinging '60's of London, but the mise en scene was London at the cusp, as attitudes were just starting to change, so characters were flopping in moral confusion.

Most remember the women as pre-liberation, but their passivity was more complicated; Alfie had an unerring ability to hone in on women with horrificallly low self-esteem, regardless of their marital or economic status.

Michael Caine is such an established actor now, none remember that he was not a conventionally handsome lead to be conquering all these women, let alone that he was a cocky Cockney like the Angry Young Man of the period kitchen sink British dramas.

Few remember just how heartless he was - calling all his conquests "it".

None seem to remember how vividly babies and abortion figure into the plot, a la "Vera Drake."

The new version is confused about all these elements.

The cinematography is beautiful, but has to cover up for the fact that while it supposedly takes place in New York City, it was actually filmed in Manchester, England so is missing atmosphere that's so critical to the same ground that's trod in "Sex and the City;" frequent background mattes of the Brooklyn Bridge are weak atmosphere-builders . And this is also some sort of retro NYC that allows smoking in bars and doesn't require helmets on mopeds, which is also a retro means of individual transport.

The film probably takes place in the '00's - but the flashy split screens and the women's make-up and styles are retro-'60's. "Keen Eddie"'s Sienna Miller is made up as a duplicate of the original's Jane Asher. Marisa Tomei even has her hair in a flip with a wide head band and Nia Long is made up like "Cleopatra Jones" from the early '70's.

At least one time we do get a glimpse of a condom package, but that's only obvious now because films today show them, not that they weren't used in the '60's; it does take place in post Roe v. Wade NYC.

The women's personality upgrades are inconsistently effective and there's no drama to how the incredibly beautiful, posh-sounding Jude Law captures them.

Susan Sarandon's self-assured, independent entrepreneur is a sexy, believable update of Shelley Winters' rich widow, making her closing dig at Alfie as a gigolo even more devastating.

Miller's character is now trendily manic depressive, or some such chemically-dependent disorder, rather than just an insecure runaway, which weakens Alfie's hold on her; that character's passive aggressive manipulation of him and how she bypasses him to straighten out her life are missing completely, so we lose some insight into both his cruelty and comeuppance.

Long's character's crisis is weakened from the original's, as her pregnancy conflates two different affairs, with the emphasis instead put on male friendship betrayal, the friend that this "Alfie" claims in passing calls his women "it".

"Alfie"'s health scare had to be updated from TB, and the cancer testing is done for laughs; the lack of mention of Viagra is odd if it is in fact taking place now. Here the older male confidante is stuck in deus ex machina, rather than in plot context.

While the original stands up 35 years later as a mordant and brilliant, matter of fact presentation of "moral lapses," the mild update is considerably weakened and Hollywoodized as respectable company, such that the finale doesn't even segue smoothly into the first musical line of "What's it all about?"

The soundtrack selections are otherwise excellent, but as confusingly retro as the rest of the atmosphere, with neo-soul teen Joss Stone singing and Mick Jagger collaborating with Dave Stewart on originals that sound old.

The great thing about being dragged to see films that you don't really want to see, is that when they turn out to be OK then you end up leaving the theatre feeling semi satisfied. And that is exactly what this remake of the 60's Michael Caine film is, OK. Caine purists have moaned that the film itself doesn't bear up well against the original, that it isn't as gritty or in some ways, seedy as its predecessor and that anything with Law in it is just style over substance. What we actually get is a poorly directed, shoddily edited, mildly entertaining popcorn flick, which IS style over substance.

Law gives a decent and somewhat infectious performance as lovable, mockney Alfie, further staking his claim towards the best do hair in the world award. There is also decent support from Omar Epps as Alfie's cheated on best mate Marlon and Susan Sarandon looking not a day over 40.

The main problem I found with the film was the blatant over directing and editing of certain scenes, especially those that involved emotion. The scene where Law is dumped by his girlfriend (Marisa Tomei) is a prime example, instead of getting what could have been a moving insight of the mind of our protagonist, we get a scene which is about 5 or 6 takes botched together, which drains any feeling there might have been altogether. Did Shyer have trouble getting actors to act? Should he stick to Steve Martin wedding films?

All in all this is 21st century, times have changed since 1966, women are no longer men's toys like they were back then, peoples attitudes to sex, abortion, and social comment are all different compared with 40 years ago and this is reflected in here.

Alfie isn't bad, it is just OK, and if you are forced into it, then probably all the better for enjoyment purposes. 6/10

This was one of the worst movies that I have been subjected to in a long time. It didn't quite know if it was: A) a chick flick because of Jude Law consuming the screen every single moment B) a manly flick because of all the hot women running around half naked.

C) Or just a hodge podge of doomed relationships/one night stands.

The movie didn't quite know what it was and left us in the same perturbed state as its main character.

Jude was adorable, the NYC life was fun to watch, but overall the movie lacked substance. And not to mention the lack of social awareness when it came to the women in the film.

Stay away... unless of course you have an undying love for Jude Law. But after sitting through this your love will wither away!

The tagline for the new film 'Alfie' ask us, what's it all about? The answer, unfortunately, is that it's about sheer disappointment.

The film focuses solely on Alfie Elkins, a swinging young womanizer packed with style and a charm that could only be British. After an all too brief introduction to our protagonist and his long list of lady-friends, some kind of plot begins to develop – sort of. We move through far too many completely unrelated situations, all of which only have any relevance at all because of their connection to our main character.

The film does almost nothing to stay focused on a character or situation long enough to develop anything genuine; one minute we have the beginnings of a story with one girl, the next minute we're on to something completely different. You may hope that the film returns to these unfinished story arcs, but it rarely does. And those special times when the story comes back to something that was left unfinished, the film manages to once again leave the story too quickly, adding further loose ends and unresolved issues.

This episodic structure does give the film a pace that is representational of Alfie's dating life – constantly moving from one thing to another, never letting anything unfold – but this does not work to the advantage of the film. Rather than giving it an interesting structure that parallels the story, it creates confusion and disorientation, and even worse than that – a loss of the empathy for the characters that would be present if the film took the time to develop characters and stories properly.

In fact, just about everything in the film lacks conviction, particularly in the places where it is needed the most; moments that should provoke emotion tend to leave the audience wanting something more substantial, which once again is an issue with the film's poor use of development.

If it weren't for Jude Law's charming performance as Alfie Elkins, the film would collapse entirely under its own poor craft. Of course, this is not at all to say that Law saves the film; he does nothing of the sort. His performance, strong as always, just happens to stop the film from being a complete waste of time. His energy is strong and his talent is clear, but it is not enough to bring the film to that next level of quality.

The photography and cinematography, while positively beautiful at times, is staggeringly inconsistent and often not at all fitting to the film's needs. Portions of the film are very nicely photographed, which almost seems like a waste of talent. A spiffy paint job on a car may be appealing to the eye, but why even bother if the car doesn't have an engine? This is precisely what Alfie is all about: some nice looks and a fairly strong performance, but sadly there is no engine to be found.