Customer Reviews

Laws of Attraction

5 star:		(22)
4 star:		(23)
3 star:		(28)
2 star:		(12)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

Not expecting much from this based upon the previews, I must say that I was pleasantly surprised by "Laws of Attraction," which is at its best when stars Pierce Brosnan and Julianne Moore manage to flirt and argue at the same time.

Moore, who's luminous, is particularly good in this movie. She plays Audrey, a top divorce attorney who manages to appear by-the-book even when she's completely insecure. With her hair in a tight bun and her perfect, subtle suit, she's putting on a front, and Moore milks this for every funny moment she can get.

Brosnan, playing her rumpled rival attorney Daniel, oozes sexiness, as well, by getting Audrey to love him by completely annoying her and catching her off-guard. He understands that the only way this woman will accept love is if it completely blindsides her, and he takes steps to do just that.

The supporting cast, particularly Frances Fisher as Audrey's plastic surgery-enhanced mother, is really strong, though I feel better use could've been made of Parker Posey, who has some funny lines in this but has been much, much better elsewhere.

As an homage to the Hepburn-Tracy movies, "Laws of Attraction" falls short. Building momentum through the chief characters' rivalry/romance, it sorta derails when the plot moves the action to Ireland instead of New York. This is a shame.

Because, when it works, "Laws of Attraction" is really charming.

Unlike many others, I really enjoyed this quirky movie. Julianne Moore is the perfect choice to play the compulsive anal-retentive divorce attorney. Her mannerisms and body language fit so well with the character. Pierce Brosnan is always a great choice for a romantic lead, and this film was a good fit for him. Pierce and Julianne had real chemistry, and their on screen presence together was heart warming. Even though this is a classified as a comedy, I liked the combination of drama and comedy.

Okay, so 'Laws of Attraction' is not going to bring home any Academy Awards, so back off a little. The critics were really hard on this movie, but I thought it was a completely enjoyable 87 minutes. If your want a similarly themed movie with move snap and wit, go check out 'Intolerable Cruely'...the Massey Pre-Nup? Now, that's great comedy.

But give me Julianne Moore over Catherine Zeta Jones any day of the week. Moore is perfectly cast here as Ms. All Prepared Smarty Pants getting dusted by a seemingly ill-prepared but cagey Pierce Brosnan. And let's give it up for Bronsan. Despite the handicap of of being almost ridiculously charming and handsome (they try to tousle him up here a bit, but it has no effect), he proves very adept at his first attempt at self-deprecating, screwball comedy

Also, Nora Dunn is a hoot. For those thinking she;s playing Nora Dunn, remember 'Three Kings'. This lady is pretty fair actress in he own right.

I was lucky enough to see a free advanced screening of this film at my college. "Laws of Attraction" is a very typcial and cheesey romantic comedy. But c'mon, sometimes we're in the mood for cheese! Among cheesey romantic comedies, "Laws" is a winner. Genuinely adorable and sweet, the movie has heart.

Brosnan takes a break from 007 and gives a most memorable performance; he earns my respect by showing me that he is, as an actor, secure enough with himself to take part in some mildly silly, self-deprecating comedy. Actually Brosnan has perhaps never been more charming, but in a much more dorky and hilarious way than as James Bond.

And what can I say about the delectable Julianne Moore, who is no doubt the hottest actress over 40? Though technically old enough to be my mother, Moore continues to be delicious eye-candy on screen. Her character insecure, slightly-neurotic, but ultimately adorable character is a joy to watch as well.

Whilst giving great performances separately, Brosnan and Moore together produce wonderfully and somewhat unexpected chemistry. I honestly did not expect the two to work so well together. They really do make a good couple. It's also refreshing to see a more "age-appropriate" couple, as the male character is typically paired up with a much younger female.
My only beef with the movie is that very forced and ridiculous plot involving Parker Posey (who is normally a wonderful actress, but here woefully mis-cast), which I felt detracted from the movie's grace.

All in all, this is a great date movie. A lot of fluff, but at least the movie doesn't pretend to be something it's not (most of the time). It's a nice 2-hour escape from the drudgeries of daily life into romantic fantasy-land.

Did Hugh Grant and George Clooney turn this one down? The perky and smart LAWS OF ATTRACTION starts out great, but the p-and-v dialog and perky plot don't (perhaps can't) hold up through the latter two-thirds of the movie.

The story clangs together sophisticated British-American attorney Daniel Rafferty (Pierce Brosnan) and Manhattan's best divorce lawyer, Audrey Woods (Julianne Moore). The wife of a successful, punk-style singer (played straight from her gut to our funny bone by the ever-amazing Parker Posey) wants a divorce, and goes to Woods for legal advice. However, she finally settles on Rafferty while Woods winds up representing the rocker husband (a satire on every mascara'ed punker since Alice Cooper, raucously played by Michael Sheen). The his-and-hers take on plaintiff and defendant brings to mind the classic ADAM'S RIB (1949) and of course the George Clooney-Katharine Zeta-Jones vehicle INTOLERABLE CRUELTY, but with a twist: here Brosnan's Rafferty is the immovable object, usually managing to stay calm and collected and one step ahead of Moore's Woods, a frenetic, goal-driven, attention-disordered Gothamite (and obviously sexually deprived) yuppie.

The tempo definitely lags and the tone gets a little mushy when both advocates have to Aer Lingus their way to Ireland to despose the household staff of the enormous castle that rocker-and-wife bought and lovingly restored before they went splitsville. It just so happens that the neighboring village is having its annual festival; in a clever she-said he-said cut the female housekeeper describes the affair to Audrey Woods as "sooo romantic" while a butler sums it up for Daniel Rafferty as "a good excuse for a three-day boozer."

Romantic it is, but Erin goes Bragh-less at the boozer when the competing attorneys wake up thinking themselves hitched! (LOVER COME BACK, anyone?). Back in Manhattan, Rafferty and Woods have to deal with their ambiguous emotions in light of their new marital status. Welcome comic relief intrudes when the grandstanding rock'n'roller and spurned wife battle like Bickersons in open court, to the consternation of a Judge Judy-like jurist (the formidable Nora Dunn).

The very end of the film (technically a fourth act, since the usual structure didn't reconcile everyone's problems) is set back in Ireland. I don't want to ruin it, but I will say that it recovers some of the pace, dialog and irreverent tone of LAWS OF ATTRACTION'S first act.

All in all, a pretty good time at the movies, though I can't help but wish that the comic tone that set the barre for the first act had held throughout the whole affair. But it's fun, it's smart, it's modern, and Frances Fischer as Audrey's fashionista mom is delightful icing on the cake. For households with kids, there is one clothes-on-the-floor scene leading to the (invisible) bedroom, but on the whole wit trumps raunch, making the film enjoyable to a wide audience.

Pierce Brosnan and Julianne Moore lock horns over a huge divorce case between a philandering rock star and his clothing designer wife. Both are excellent lawyers and both are con men under their skins. Brosnan is the superior con man but Moore rises to meet the challenge. Throw in a sumptuous castle in Ireland and these two find themselves married after a night of heavy drinking and festivities. Brosnan wants to keep the marriage. Moore does not.

More than a little part of whether you will enjoy this movie or not depends on whether you find Brosnan's charm and shenanigans endearing or not. Much of the humor is found in Moore's neurotic behavior and her boiling under the surface reactions to her continually falling into Brosnan's traps. (Many find the lovely and eccentric Ireland presented here very funny and endearing in and of itself. Others are immune to the vapers of this romantic Ireland and so may find the movie a little weak.) The writing is witty and devilish without being overly sophisticated or literary. The overt message that marriages are worth fighting for is positively reactionary in our divorce weary world. That may be a little to close to home for some in the movie-going public. On the other hand, every married person has woke up in the morning to wonder just who is this person I married. We spend the rest of our days trying to understand and love our spouse. Sometimes one of us is quite bad at it. That's where a little charm and a sense of humor can bridge the gap.

This movie is much better than many would lead you to believe. Predictable? I suppose. Funny? You bet. Ridiculous? All over the place. . You note that in many review guides that some films that start with two stars grow over the years to three stars and even eventually four. Laws Of Attraction will be one of those films.

I am not surprised that this film garnered such poor reviews; it attempts to rehash an age-old formula that was popular in the 1940s but fails to deliver the same punch lines and star power. However, I was still pleasantly entertained by the film, even if half its weight is carried by the chemistry between the two leads.

Pierce Brosnan is a suprising but appropriate choice for the suave disheveled lawyer, and Julianne Moore shines as the smart, independent, and sexy woman of the twenty-first century. The plot is screwy, turning this way and that into outrageous situations, but I didn't mind that so much when Brosnan and Moore appeared on screen together.

Audrey Woods, played by Moore, was first in her class at Yale, and is now New York's most successful and best lawyer. That is, until she meets her match in the form of Pierce Brosnan. Their courtroom spats are like lovers' quarrels, and are simply delightful to watch. Things get a bit screwy when they leave the United States and fly off to Ireland on a case, in which they are once again representing opposite sides. But all ends happily, as it should. After all, this is a sappy and cliche romantic comedy, and we can't have it too close to reality.

The DVD contains a smattering of deleted scenes and an alternate ending, which I would've preferred.

All in all, a lovely escapist way to spend a Friday evening.

Julianne Moore and Pierce Brosnan are gifted and good-looking actors, and in Romantic Comedies we like to see beautiful and pleasant people interacting. They are joined by Frances Fisher (as Julianne's mother) and Michael Sheen and Parker Posey (as the empty-headed rock-star and his hip clothing-designer wife).

Moore and Brosnan play hot-shot divorce lawyers. She is type-A with no time for a personal life, and he is laid-back and, although he looks like Pierce Brosnan, has apparently been waiting around for 40-something years to find the love of his life in Julianne Moore, who has no time or interest in him initially.

Okay - the template for Romantic Comedies is that two people who maybe are an unlikely couple get put together. If this script had taken these two and done some unique things with them, I would no doubt have upgraded my rating.

*sigh*

But the movies does not do unique things. Do you think there's a scene where they are suddenly thrust together into a romantic night, which they regret afterward? How about a scene later on where you, the audience, *know* that they should be together, but there's a little misunderstanding and one of them tears off for an airport - followed just a MOMENT TOO LATE by the other person who makes a mad dash for the airport?

The Julianne Moore character is supposed to be a top-notch lawyer - first in her class at Yale or Harvard (sorry, I forget which one) - but she bumbles a little bit more than is really believable for that. This isn't her fault as an actress, but rather of the screenplay.

I'd love to see this cast working within the framework of a more original story.

I noticed a lot of reviews here saying that "Laws of Attraction" is one movie you want to skip, but I say otherwise. I believe this movie was reeeeally great! I'm not a huge fan of Pierce Brosnan, and I've seen only one Julianne Moore movie. But this one caught my attention.

My sister and mom had seen it a couple times when they rented it. I thought "This doesn't look like something I'd like", but I bought it because my sister said it was good, and I know my mom liked it. So I figured, if I don't like it, my mom will take it off my hands. It was on sale, need I say more? So I sat down one night and watched it. I bought it about a week ago, and I've sat down and watched it FIVE times! That's how good it is.

I'm more of a person who goes for a good comedy, and this hit the spot. I think the actions between Moore and Brosnan were just hilarious. It was just funny that for every thing Brosnan's character said, Moore's character had some retaliating remark for it! I just loved it! Cracked me up every time.

So don't listen to 90% of the reviews here. Rent it. It's worth the $4 at Blockbuster or Hollywood Video. If you don't like it, the money wouldn't be entirely wasted. Look on the bright side. You could have wasted it on "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow". Now that's a movie that you need to skip no matter how much you like Gwyneth Paltrow or Jude Law.

"Laws of Attraction" opened last April to scathing reviews - banal, uninspired, outdated, etc. To me, romantic comedies are like houses - there are just so many house plans and facades out there. The trick is to make something interesting out of the available options. Viewed this way, "Laws of Attraction' succeeds. It's not a romantic comedy on the order of "Notting Hill", "Four Weddings a Funeral" or "Love Actually". But it is an amicable piece of work. It's utterly predictable in the same way Doris Day / Rock Hudson comedies were in the 1960s.

The story is as old as they get, dating back as far as 1948's, "State of the Union", which starred Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn as two married-to-each-other lawyers who find themselves battling each other in a bitter case.

In this modern rendition, the two attorneys are not married to each other - yet. Audrey [Julianne Moore] is a New York divorce lawyer who has never lost a case. She meets her match in Daniel [Pierce Brosnan], who has also batted a thousand in court. What ensues is a battle of wits and wills, but, of course, it's really love the two are after.

"Laws of Attraction" really is old-fashioned. It's about the man conquering a woman who is at least his equal. And it's about a strong woman who feels superior to men until she meets Mr. Right. Yet is this really sexist? If you are strong, do you respect - much less `fall for' -someone who is at least as strong as you are? And isn't the strong man falling for the strong woman a positive thing?

Perhaps Moore and Brosnan realized early in production that this movie wasn't that special. If so, then they make the movie succeed by giving their usual professional performances. Moore in a weak movie is better to watch than most actresses in strong one. Brosnan may not be a great actor, but he is always charming and a joy to see.