Music and Lyrics
Essay Preview: Music and Lyrics
Report this essay
In this middling romantic comedy, Hugh Grant plays Alex, a washed up singer who once topped the charts as part of a famous 80s pop duo (think the other guy from Wham!), but whose career is now reduced to nostalgia gigs on the class reunion and state fair circuit. Alex is scraping the bottom of the barrel when a hot new pop sensation named Cora suddenly appears (an inspired performance by newcomer Haley Bennett that makes you wonder why she doesnt give up acting and take on Shakira). Cora tells Alex how much his 80s hits meant to her and asks him to write a song for them to perform together on her next album. This is Alexs big break, a second chance at fame, only he doesnt have a lyricist. Enter Drew Barrymore as Sophie, who has arrived at Alexs door to water his plants for him, and who just happens to have a gift for rhyme.
The idea behind “Music and Lyrics,” that two people can complement each other so well that their union makes them better people–the “you complete me” theme–is the basic ingredient of romantic comedies. Unlike melodramas, that deal with the vinegar and baking soda of dysfunctional relationships (the “you destroy me” theme), romantic comedies endlessly offer us variations of the perfect couple, no matter how much they seem like polar opposites at first glance. They are the gin and vermouth, the sweet and sour, the peanut butter and jelly of love. Whose cynical heart hasnt been zapped back to life by couples like Tracy and Hepburn, Rob and Laura Petrie, Marsha Mason and Richard Dreyfuss (remember “The Goodbye Girl”?), Tom and Meg, Billy and Meg, Woody and Diane?
And now, theres Hugh and Drew. Unfortunately, that is what is wrong with “Music and Lyrics.” It may not be fair to blame one of the partners when a relationship doesnt seem to be working (counselors constantly remind us that both partners contribute to the dynamic), but I cant help but point my finger at Drew Barrymore. Its hard to explain why she seems so wrong for the part of Sophie. It may have something to do with the lack of chemistry between her and Grant, but I think it has more to do with a basic lack in the Drew Barrymore persona.
Neurotic, self-conscious, high maintenance, goofy, klutzy, temperamental–these are the qualities of the women in romantic comedies, and Drew Barrymore just isnt any of these. Shes a sweet, sensible, big-hearted, even maternal child/woman whose appeal is nurturing, even (here comes the insult) calming–shes a Hallmark card, a rose without the thorns. Drew Barrymore does display a strong feminist streak underneath the sweetness, which is good, but there doesnt seem to be any crisp intelligence behind it. Maybe thats why her films opposite Adam Sandler worked so well. With the bar Sandler set, Drew couldnt help but rise above it.
But alongside Hugh Grant, Barrymoress strengths dont seem as enchanting. When Drew delivers Sophies lines verbalizing her neuroses in a wave of freeform monologue, the potential humor is lost. And the physical comedy falls flat as well. A big joke in the film is that shes a plant sitter who seems to know nothing about plants, and when she pours water on a plastic plant, its supposed to bring a laugh. Drew watered the hell out of that plant, and I still couldnt muster a chuckle. If Diane Keaton had been holding that watering can, I probably would have been doubling over from the pain in my side. Better yet, make that Woody Allen with the watering can.
The only time I was doubling over in laughter was during the opening sequence when Hugh Grant sings and gyrates in a hilarious send-up of 80s music videos. Watching Hugh Grant playing a lovable cad is always quite funny, but the fact that he does a believable job as a pop singer with just the right hip moves makes it all the more charming.
Hugh