Reviewed by Colin Jacobson (December 10, 2023)
While it did well elsewhere – especially in the UK – 2003’s Love Actually failed to find a large audience in the US. In that territory, the film ended up in 49th place for the 2002 box office, stuck between fellow Christmas movie Bad Santa and not-at-all Christmas movie Gothika.
However, over the last 20 years, Americans joined their counterparts across the pond in their affection for this ensemble romantic comedy and turned Love Actually into something of a modern classic. That said, it doesn’t come without controversies, but we’ll address those later.
Set mainly in London during the lead-up to Christmas, we meet a mix of locals. In particular, we observe their romantic travails and successes.
That might become the shortest plot synopsis I ever wrote. Given the size of the cast, however, I figured I should keep it short ‘n’ sweet rather than devote many paragraphs to specifics about the slew of characters.
Actually indeed throws a lot of participants at us – too many, in my opinion. Even at 135 minutes, the film attempts to balance so many roles that inevitably, all get the short shrift.
I won’t even attempt to count how many major characters we locate, primarily because I can’t claim Actually delivers any main personalities. Of course, that happens with ensembles, but few movies come with so many roles that become so equally distributed.
By that I mean most multi-character stories tend to favor some much more than others. Instead, Actually distributes screen time fairly evenly – I guess, as I didn’t clock minutes per role.
Anyway, this just feels like too many folks for one 135-minute movie to balance. We never really get to know any of those involved, and that severely impacts our ability to care about them or invest in their narratives.
Given that the entire film revolves around romance and relationships, an inability to give two hoots about any of the people feels like what I like to call a “fatal flaw”. Because Actually exists as a rom-com, it lives and dies with its characters, and their utter inability to manifest interesting or intriguing personalities harpoons the project.
As a middle-aged hetero dude, I realize that Actually doesn’t exist for my demographic. Not that rom-coms can’t appeal to folks in my pack, but movies such as this primarily aim for women.
Nonetheless, good films transcend genre. I find no reason that Actually couldn’t have brought a charming and enjoyable experience regardless of my demographic group.
Indeed, I expected to like Actually. Some of that stems from its aforementioned reputation as a modern Christmas classic, but I mainly felt that way because of the personnel involved.
Though Actually marked Richard Curtis’s debut as a director, he enjoyed a successful career as a writer. With films such as Four Weddings and a Funeral, Bridget Jones’s Diary and Notting Hill under his belt, the man knows his way around rom-coms.
I might blame the issues here on Curtis’s inexperience as director, and that acts as a possible concern. Actually suffers from awkward pacing that makes it progress in a herky-jerky manner.
Again, a lot of this stems from the overstuffed nature of the project. With so many characters to service, it becomes difficult to transition smoothly among them.
Because Curtis also wrote the screenplay, however, he can’t blame someone else for these issues. He also can’t fault others for the movie’s persistently sappy tone.
Given the cast and the traditionally arch British sense of humor, I expected more snap to Actually. Instead, although we find bites of humor, the film concentrates much more on the “rom” than the “com”.
Curtis doesn’t do romance well and this leads to a soggy and uninspiring collection of love connections. None of the characters tend to feel especially real and they veer down too many cutesy or maudlin paths.
This means we find a film surprisingly devoid of humor or charm, an even more startling result given the amazing cast Curtis landed. We find a group that includes Hugh Grant, Keira Knightley, Emma Thompson, Liam Neeson, Bill Nighy, Colin Firth, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Laura Linney, Alan Rickman and plenty of others.
That cast does help elevate the material a little, but they can’t overcome the inherent mawkishness of the film. Sure, a Love Actually with a weaker set of actors would’ve become a worse film, but given that the end product seems so blah, I can’t imagine a huge decline.
As for the controversies I mentioned at the start, the main theme comes from the film’s submissive view of women. Very few of the film’s females exist as anything other than fairly passive subjects of male affection and attention.
And these components lack any form of depth beyond simple male fantasies. In the flick’s most famous scene, Mark (Andrew Lincoln) uses handwritten cards to declare his love for Juliet (Knightley).
Juliet recently married Peter (Ejiofor), Mark’s best friend. Even though Mark literally has never spoken to Juliet, he falls “deeply” in love with her and stages this elaborate gesture to woo her.
Which he does at the house Peter and Juliet share. With Peter home at the time, and Mark uses deceit to keep his presence unknown from his “pal”.
Icky much?
And then there’s Jamie (Firth), a writer who decamps to France after his girlfriend cheats on him. He meets housekeeper Aurélia (Lúcia Moniz), a Portuguese woman who speaks no English.
Nonetheless, of course they fall in love despite the fact they never communicate with each other in a meaningful manner. Sure, the film depicts a non-verbal connection, but this still feels more like male fantasy than a realistic romance.
And so on. Only the story of Sarah (Linney) comes from a clear female POV, and it feels like a gratuitous addition.
Beyond all this nonsense, we find a bizarre fascination with the alleged obesity of one character. Natalie (Martine McCutcheon) works for new Prime Minister David (Grant) and they eventually fall in love.
For reasons I can’t discern, characters make many comments about Natalie’s overweight status. Which would be bad enough if true.
However, McCutcheon was far from fat. Indeed, I find her to be the most attractive member of the cast, so the notion she’s a “plumper” just seems bizarre and cruel.
Even without these issues, though, Actually becomes a dud due to its lack of wit, charm and convincing sentiment. Millions love this slop but I can’t figure out why.
Note that both US and UK versions of Actually exist and the Blu-ray provides the US edition. The two appear to differ solely via a couple minor musical choices so don’t expect any story/character variations.
