Up with Love, Down with this picture! PHEWEEE!
16 May 2003
Yes, this one stinks and is destined for early weekday morning telecast on Comedy Central. Retro when it should have been homage, blinding when it should have been bright, rushed when it should have been snappy, and dull when it should have been romantic, DOWN WITH LOVE was a good concept poorly executed. No one working on this film seemed to have a clue (or appreciation) for the type of film they were spoofing/remaking, and the main reason is that the producers failed to hire anyone (director, writer, cinematographer, craft services) that had anything remotely to do with the originals (or the sixties for that matter!). I know they are still around because I see them interviewed on television all the time. The director and writer's experience don't reach back much further than TV's THE NANNY, and every minute of the film looks it! Even the best things about the movie, the sets and costumes, look post-modern retro, not authentic. Any decorator can find lime green and purple fabrics, but it takes real love for those colors to make it work on screen.

Mel Brooks loved the old genres he spoofed (these were the films he grew up watching), but look at a film like YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN and there are scenes which are as much of the genre as the original. The set from the original FRANKENSTEIN was used to recreate the reanimation scene! Tony Randall's small role in DOWN WITH LOVE (and his modern-day counterpart David Hyde Pierce) helps a little, but doesn't help the rest of the film. The inspiration was in the costumes and sets, not in the script and not in the direction. Too bad the actors relied on the script and direction one hundred per cent. Let's hope THE ITALIAN JOB does a better job at remaking hip. Let's hope the writers go back to sitcoms where they belong.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed