The Age of Commercialism

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Yay, "Laws of Attraction" is a good movie, despite having many romantic clichés and not being funny.The way the lawyers were portrayed here was very realistic and Julianne Moore gives a perfect acting.I was about to rate this movie very high, but after Rafferty's statement about the four million check, the movie died for me. It was the most unethical a counselor could have done, it disgusted me as a law student. And it disgusted even more that Audrey forgave this and got back with him.Also, the marriage thing looked very amateur to me. If their wedding in Ireland was just in church, how would the American media (and justice) consider them "legally bound" if they didn't sign any contract at all?But over all, the movie is quite interesting and worth a watch ;)

Julianne Moore and Pierce Brosnan freshly pair up in McKenna's splendid 'Laws of Attraction'. It is sort of an unusual romantic comedy set partly in America and partly in Ireland. Moore and Brosnan are a delight to watch, especially how their love story unfolds in the courtroom. Brosnan is great at playing the Irishman (as he also proved in 'Evelyn') perhaps because he is one. Moore keeps proving what an incredibly versatile actress she is as she shows a flair for comedy. But it is the scenes between Frances Fisher and Julianne Moore that I enjoyed watching the most. The movie has some great punchlines the best of which are delivered by Fisher. Lending hilarious support are Michael Sheen as a rockstar and Parker Posey as his fashion designer wife. The Irish scenes may be a little clichéd and 'touristy' but nonetheless fun to watch. On the flip side, 'Laws of Attraction' felt a bit rushed in parts and the plot could have been better developed. However, that doesn't stop it from making the viewers laugh out loud and root for Daniel and Audrey to succeed in their fun romantic adventure.

Laws of Attraction (2004) ** (out of 4) Audrey Woods (Julianne Moore) is a very successful divorce attorney who spends most of her nights alone in her apartment eating junk food. Whenever she does get out of the house she's usually with her aging mother (Francis Fisher) who has had a few too many operations done to make her look younger. Audrey swears up and down that she isn't afraid of relationships but instead just can't get involved because she's too busy with her clients' needs.While taking on a major divorce case she meets her new opposing attorney, the very handsome Daniel Rafferty (Pierce Brosnan) who has yet to lose a case. The two don't strike it off too well but their jobs force them into a business dinner where they end up having too much to drink and eventually falling into bed. Audrey blames the booze but Daniel seems to want a relationship but when their case starts to break up so does the relationship. Soon the New York media has a spotlight on the two most powerful divorce attorneys who seem to be having their own fights behind the scenes.For starters let's get some personal feelings out into the air. To me, Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn were the greatest on-screen duo in the history of film. Their romantic comedies ranging from Adam's Rib to my personal favorite Woman of the Year are among the greatest films ever made and when watching this Adam's Rib wannabe I couldn't help but notice these romantic comedies haven't changed in sixty plus years. Once again we get an attractive couple fighting, screaming, fighting some more and then realizing they are in love.I'm certainly not a sourpuss but my God, could writers try to come up with at least one original idea when doing these types of films? Perhaps this genre has just been beaten to death so bad that those watching these films want the fighting then at the last minute makeup but to me watching films like this are becoming a very tiresome chore because by the time the opening credits are over there's really no point in watching the film because it's something you've seen countless times before. I'm not saying one should kill the other's family at the end of the movie but please, offer at least one thing that differs from the other twenty romantic comedies that are released each year.Is Laws of Attraction a horrible movie? No, none of these films ever are but I don't see the point in watching the same thing over and over. The only difference in these types of films are the leading actors and the success of raising the screenplay out of boredom lies on their shoulders. Pierce Brosnan is a very charming actor and certainly the best thing going for this film. He isn't offered much to do but he's charm and smile at least bring some freshness to this overdone film. Julianne Moore on the other hand has always left a sore spot with me. To me, Moore can either be brilliant or fall flat on her face and that's exactly what she does her. She brought nothing new to her character and didn't have half the charm of Brosnan.With the all too familiar story and the lack of any real chemistry between the stars there really isn't much left in the film. Francis Fisher is wasted in the tired role of an old hag who is constantly giving advice in between her plastic surgeries. Parker Posey, a wonderful character actress, comes off looking very bad in the role of a divorcée who has nothing to do but keep asking Brosnan to cut her husband's balls off. That certain male part is also a constant running joke throughout the movie and not once did it make me laugh or smile, which is a shame because I enjoy private jokes. In the end, if you walk into your local rental store and see Laws of Attraction on the shelf, run towards the classics area and pick up Adam's Rib or Woman of the Year.

The movie wasn't that appealing to me the first time around ... but at the second viewing, I liked it more. It's a fast paced, dialog heavy and funny movie. It has it's weak points, but the humor and the good chemistry (between Brosnan and Moore).What almost brings it down (apart from the flaws in the script/story) is that it's too long. It also starts fast but slows down, after a "climax" scene between the two leads. The subplot with Michael Sheen and Parker Posey is overblown too (although it does have it's right to be there, for metaphorical reasons). If you can overlook those failings than you will be able to enjoy this romantic comedy! :o)