Despite liking romantic comedy (there are some good ones out there, as well as some not so good ones) and liking Reese Witherspoon and Michael Sheen in other things, expectations were low for 'Home Again' due to the mixed to negative critical reception and mixed audience reaction.
Watching it with an open mind 'Home Again' has its bright spots, enough to make it a one-time watch, and is better than reputed. On the other hand, it also is an uneven film and mostly forgettable fluff. As said, it has good things. Witherspoon, being the lead, was crucial for the film to work, the good news is that, although she has been better in material worthier of her talent, she gives her character and 'Home Again' a very likable energy and very sweet charm. The other acting standout is Sheen, who does bag some very funny (at times hilarious) moments that gives the film much needed levity and gravitas.
The best performance of the three young men taken in goes to Jon Rudnitsky, his character is the most interestingly written of the three and he is the most charismatic and easy to like of the three. 'Home Again' is nicely made with a peppy score, while also boasting a good-natured sweet tone, some funny, cheerful moments and a few snappy lines. The children are cute without being overly so.
'Home Again' however could have been much better. The film does feel rushed (while there are some scenes too that limp), which would have been solved easily with a longer length (15 minutes more would have made a difference) and trying to do less. It does feel like too much was crammed in and it consequently means that the film lacks depth in particularly how the characters are written. Here they are thinly sketched, one-dimensional and shallow. Humorous and touching moments are too far and between in a film that has very blandly fluffy romantic elements and other comedic elements that feel overplayed.
Of the three tyros only Rudnitsky works, whereas the other two struggle to keep up, their characters are too sketchily written, their dialogue is even weaker and they don't have the expertise or charisma here to rise above what they're given. Poor Candice Bergen is wasted with nothing to do, she never gets the chance to show off her charm and spunk. Some snappy moments in the script and sporadic funny and touching moments aside, the script is an over-egged and under-cooked soufflé with its fair share of awkward and cheesy lines and severe underwriting of the characters and their increasingly predictable and vague situations. Some interesting ideas and insights here that could have been delved into more.
Story-wise, everything just feels too pat and formulaic, and too much of it doesn't really go anywhere or feel resolved satisfactorily. There is very little to the conflict.
All in all, fluffy and not very memorable. Not unwatchable however, there are far worse films out there, of the genre, of the year and ever. 5/10 Bethany Cox
Watching it with an open mind 'Home Again' has its bright spots, enough to make it a one-time watch, and is better than reputed. On the other hand, it also is an uneven film and mostly forgettable fluff. As said, it has good things. Witherspoon, being the lead, was crucial for the film to work, the good news is that, although she has been better in material worthier of her talent, she gives her character and 'Home Again' a very likable energy and very sweet charm. The other acting standout is Sheen, who does bag some very funny (at times hilarious) moments that gives the film much needed levity and gravitas.
The best performance of the three young men taken in goes to Jon Rudnitsky, his character is the most interestingly written of the three and he is the most charismatic and easy to like of the three. 'Home Again' is nicely made with a peppy score, while also boasting a good-natured sweet tone, some funny, cheerful moments and a few snappy lines. The children are cute without being overly so.
'Home Again' however could have been much better. The film does feel rushed (while there are some scenes too that limp), which would have been solved easily with a longer length (15 minutes more would have made a difference) and trying to do less. It does feel like too much was crammed in and it consequently means that the film lacks depth in particularly how the characters are written. Here they are thinly sketched, one-dimensional and shallow. Humorous and touching moments are too far and between in a film that has very blandly fluffy romantic elements and other comedic elements that feel overplayed.
Of the three tyros only Rudnitsky works, whereas the other two struggle to keep up, their characters are too sketchily written, their dialogue is even weaker and they don't have the expertise or charisma here to rise above what they're given. Poor Candice Bergen is wasted with nothing to do, she never gets the chance to show off her charm and spunk. Some snappy moments in the script and sporadic funny and touching moments aside, the script is an over-egged and under-cooked soufflé with its fair share of awkward and cheesy lines and severe underwriting of the characters and their increasingly predictable and vague situations. Some interesting ideas and insights here that could have been delved into more.
Story-wise, everything just feels too pat and formulaic, and too much of it doesn't really go anywhere or feel resolved satisfactorily. There is very little to the conflict.
All in all, fluffy and not very memorable. Not unwatchable however, there are far worse films out there, of the genre, of the year and ever. 5/10 Bethany Cox