Letters to Juliet: Movie Review

I'll be honest, seeing Letters to Juliet was really the last thing on my mind. I had no real interest in sitting through another rom-com and seeing the exact same plot developments we've all seen a hundred times before. However, when I realized that Jose Rivera was one of the co-writers of this flick I knew I had to give it a shot. Rivera has written for Diffr'ent Strokes and Family Matters as well as the film The Motorcycle Diaries and one of my personal favourites: Trade.  Tim Sullivan, the other co-writer is fairly new to me; and so I didn't know what to expect.  However, I decided to give it a try; I really didn't want to see other movies like Valentine's Day or Everybody's Fine yet found myself thoroughly enjoying both of those flicks... maybe Letters to Juliet would buck the trend of the regular rom-com and provide me with some decent laughs and some unexpected plot twists.  I was sorely disappointed.

Letters to Juliet follows Sophie (played by Amanda Seyfried - who has a surprising amount of arm hair) who goes on a 'pre' honeymoon with her fiance, Victor (played by Gael Garcia Bernal) to Verona. While in Verona she and her fiance slowly drift apart while he tries to find suppliers for his New York Italian restaurant and she starts to help out the secretaries of Juliet. An organization of women who respond to love/help letters that are left by women who come all the way from around the world to leave a letter at the wall of Juliet Capulet. Sophie finds a letter in the wall that has been hidden in a hole for fifty years; she responds and to her surprise the author of the letter, Claire (played by the ever-talented Vanessa Redgrave) and her grandson Charlie (Christopher Egan) show up in Verona to follow the advice of the letter and find Claire's long lost love.  Meanwhile everyone, Victor excluded, learns more about who they are and how they want to live their lives regardless of the consequences.

The movie is, to be frank, boring. The plot, as simple as it is, feels almost insignificant in the long run and the audience gets confused over what the main plot truly is. The movie has many subplots but no real singular plot. Sophie wants to become a writer for The New Yorker leads to Sophie finding a story and becoming a writer for The New Yorker. Sophie is engaged to an inattentive fiance who cares more for his restaurant than her leads to Sophie realizing she needs to take control of her life and find someone who is willing to change for her - which to me is a horrible message. The fact that even the man she finds in this plot to 'love her' and she finds herself 'falling in love' with requires change and he even makes a comment that is along the lines of how he would change who he was for her... can't she find someone compatible to her own needs without requiring a drastic change? Finally there's the plot where Claire comes to Verona to find her old lover; all intertwined through the shit-disturbing Sophie.  Three plots; which even intertwined to formulate one plot feel scattered, drawn out much longer than need be and also dreadfully boring.

The movie is your typical rom-com made in the likeness of Shakespeare's Romeo & Juliet; two lovers whose families are so different yet they find themselves being pulled closer together despite what the consequences may be; however it's also dreadfully boring and the only likable character is Claire; but that could just be because Vanessa Redgrave was the only talented actor in the film.  Gary Winick has been a director of many misses; including 13 Going on 30 and Bride Wars; it is not surprising that Letters to Juliet is a mere follow-up.

Amanda Seyfried seems to be getting a lot of attention ever since she shared a kiss with Megan Fox in Jennifer's Body, yet no one seems to remember that flick and it's not even a year old.  Despite the fact that she is on the hit HBO show Big Love much attention is from her more risque roles with Boogie Woogie and Chloe. In many ways she reminds me of Anne Hathaway; a decent actress who went wild in a few movies and just hasn't been the same since her Disney days.  Has Seyfried's time already come and pass? Her acting in this film would certainly suggest so.  Don't even get me started on Gael Garcia Bernal - I don't even know what the hell he was trying to do. His character's behaviour was so erratic; that I'm not sure if his character came off as a two-dimensional character because of his lack of talent or the lack of writing skills involved in this film. Finally; the best for last; Christopher Egan who fluctuates from being a total douche bag to a love-struck puppy and back again.  His acting was almost more two-dimensional than that of Bernal's.

Ultimately this movie fails on many levels; a poor script and dull acting are just the first two and they are enough for me to warn you to skip this film. I understand that it's got that romantic nature that many people out there like; but I guarantee you before; if romantic-comedies are your genre you've seen this film before; many times.

1.5 out of 5 stars