The Auteur of Affection

Full disclosure: Besides being a longtime Richard Curtis fan, I did notes on a draft of About Time while it was in development, so I can’t claim objectivity. But it’s worth noting that on the page, the script made this seasoned, often cynical reader laugh and cry.

The finished film had the same effect, not that it’s comfortable to admit it. In our current cultural moment of snark and twerk, enjoying Curtis has become a guilty pleasure. Even at his best (Four Weddings and a Funeral, Notting Hill, The Girl in the Café, and roughly half of Love Actually), Curtis can veer into sentimentality, and his world has the rarefied glossy sheen of London-gone-Hollywood. The darker, uglier edges of human passion rarely if ever enter into his pictures, and the fairytale-like upscale milieu in this one may irk a populist’s soul.

Nonetheless, Curtis is a modern master of a genre that can often make you hate yourself in the morning for having enjoyed it. Singularly adept at writing the sort of sophisticated, witty dialogue that can make a rom-com take flight, he’s sharp at physical comedy, too. And while making old-fashioned big screen romance credible (no mean feat) he’s buttressed it with an admirable gallery of memorable supporting characters. If you’ve seen Four Weddings, I’ll wager you’d recognize the friends of its hapless hero on sight as easily as you’d tag Hugh Grant.

I’ve written here and elsewhere of Curtis’s way with ensembles: whether it’s the buddy-friends of Weddings, Hill, Actually or Bridget Jones’s Diary (co-written with Andrew Davies and Helen Fielding), he always provides his leads with foils who are as funny as they are distinctive (Spike, anyone?), and they tend to travel in convivial packs.

In this respect, About Time is both different and the same: this time the supporting cast is mostly family. And “mostly family” is the true Get Out Your Handkerchiefs factor in what comes on as both a straight-up romantic comedy and a domestic science fiction pic. About that: Yes, the men in the family of protagonist Tim (Domhnall Gleason) can travel back in time, but only within their own lifetimes, so there’s none of that killing Hitler stuff, as Tim’s dad (Bill Nighy) is quick to point out.

What truly pulls at the heartstrings in this story, reportedly Curtis’s last outing as a director, is the relationship between father and son, and son and sister, along with an endearing mom and the (literally) odd uncle. While the movie is carp-worthy and will be too sweet and neat for some folks’ taste, I lapped it up, though it made me realize that romantic passion is not, in fact, Curtis’s forte.

What this writer has always been about, I believe, is the evocation of affection – the kind of love that largely remains unspoken between friends and is rarely articulated well among relatives. In fact, after their initial tryst (a sexual wish fulfillment fantasy that’s amusingly well-played), the love between Tim and Mary (a glowing Rachel McAdams) most vividly crops up in the sort of small moments that people in many long-term relationships will recognize: the times – in passing, say, on the run, even en route to sleep – when you appreciate your lover as a true friend and cherished companion.

Affection, often underrated next to unbridled emotional intensity, is what fills in the canvas of a Curtis movie. In a sense, Four Weddings is a series of comedic portrayals of how much fun it can be to “take the piss out of” a pal, as is his Pirate Radio; Actually is replete with moments between non-lovers where the tenderness, warmth, and caring between people, however humorously expressed, is what’s being put on fond display. Dad’s advice to son Tim in Time – “Marry someone who’s kind” – echoes this ethos.

The affection between Dad and Tim in About Time is the linchpin of the movie, and in Bill Nighy, who did a far more flamboyant turn with such material as the aging rocker in Actually, director Curtis has found his ultimate avatar. Nighy, a study in the art of effortlessness, makes fond feelings – in that quintessentially British, let’s-not-make-a-fuss-about it manner – a quiet joy to behold. About Time, with its simple but inarguable theme of being here now as the key to living a fulfilling life, is a celebration of affection worth savoring.

Comments

[E.C. Henry]

Can't wait to see this movie. Think it's being released in the Pacific Northwest (the Seattle area) next week, because this week it's not in any of the theatres, YET the Seattle Times did a review of the movie in their Friday edition.

HUGE fan of Rachel McAdams. LOVE her as a heroine in a rom-com. The new "it" girl? Hmmm... Well, I like her anyway.

You're so blessed, Billy, to have been given the priveledge of reading and doing notes on Richard Curtis' work. What an honor to get to work with a pro like Richard Curtis. We need more Richard Curtis' in the world. Wish he'd write a rom-com every year or two. I don't think we've gotten enough out this man.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

[Sue Hepworth]

Apart from Four Weddings, I am not a fan of Richard Curtis' Rom-Coms. He doesn't speak to me in the way that Nora Ephron does/did. I've always thought his Rom-Coms overrated, as opposed to his British sit-com Blackadder, which was brilliant.
And if I had not read this post, I'd be avoiding this new Curtis film. But if you really think it's worth seeing, I'll give it a go.

[Bradford Richardson]

Billy, Beautifully, and expertly written analysis. A sweetly positive recommendation too. Thank you.

[mernitman]

EC: Well, the good news is that although he's said he doesn't want to direct any more films, he does intend to write more...

Sue H: I fear that if Curtis isn't your cup of tea, the new one won't speak to you, either - it's pretty much more of the same Curtis! - so please don't go on my account.

Thank you, Bradford: Glad you liked.

[Dave]

Sadly, I will never see this movie since it's shot in shaky cam. A very poor decision -- it makes it unwatchable by 5-10% of the public. That's how many of us get sick when watching movies/TV with the shaky camera. And the shaky camera NEVER adds to the story. In fact, I find the worse the script is, the more you need unmotivated camera moves and CGI. If the script and acting are good, then there's no need to attempt to artificially create excitement by having the cameraman simulate an epileptic seizure while filming. Too bad.

[Roland Denzel]

Thanks for the great 'review!' I'm a huge fan of Curtis, but I cringed when I heard the time travel part. I never imagined mixing such real life works with a sci fi ingredient. Not that his regular worlds are realistic, but you can pretend and do just fine.

I would have gone anyway, but I might have gone alone, instead of taking my wife (she's a fan, although I'm sure she doesn't know it (she just watches his movies with me and loves them)).

Roland

[mernitman]

Dave: Understood, and that is a shame. About Time is not half as shaky as many of the movies that truly abuse this technique, but even so... Sorry to hear that this is a barrier to your experience, and thanks for bringing the issue to everyone's attention.

Roland: The sci-fi factor is played way down; the "technique" used by the characters to time travel is so minimal and simple that it seems a tongue-in-cheek parody of such devices. I think your wife will be fine with it.

[Rob in L.A.]

What do you make of Curtis' penchant (or at least that of a few movies from his scripts) to pair British men with (North) Americans women (and in the case of "Bridget Jones," an American actress playing an Englishwoman)? Is it just to make his movies more marketable overseas? Or is there more to it than that?

[mernitman]

Rob, from the interviews I've read it's almost Rashomon-like: McAdams speaks of having "reached out to Richard" about being in the movie, while he talks about having badly wanted her and thinking she wouldn't want to do it. But neither (and no one I can find online) addresses this Curtisian tic that you've rightfully pointed a forefinger at. My own personal theory - wholly unsubstantiated by fact so far as I know - is that Curtis saw how well he did with "an American girl" in Four Weddings, and has thus been repeating himself (consciously or un) ever since - with, I'm sure, the support of an American studio (my own) who would absolutely want to cross-pollinate such very British products with at least one American star.

[Debra Montoya]

Don't feel guilty, Billy! Come over to the sappy side. It's delightful!