2.03.2014

Fumble!

Once again, it's the month of love and like last year I seem to have an inordinate amount of post ideas swirling around in my brain, itching to get out. One such topic came to mind this weekend after reading JK Rowling admit in an interview that it was a mistake having Hermione and Ron end up together. It made me ponder some other such mistakes in some romantic movie and tv pairings. Last year I wrote a post about couples who wouldn't stay together (two of the couples make encore appearances on this list)...this time I'm focusing more on the blunders in how the relationship was handled. Whether these couples shouldn't have gotten together in the first place, had a better second option and blew it, or their love interests simply weren't worthy of them (perhaps even due to chemistry issues with casting)..these writers/filmmakers fumbled the ball in getting everyone on board for their love stories.

HARRY POTTER - I'll start with the one that inspired the post. I don't necessarily hate Ron and Hermione together...I just don't understand why Harry and Hermione wouldn't be each other's first choices. Ron is a decent bloke, but for someone who is constantly trying to achieve perfection you can't convince me that in the love department Hermione thought Ron was IT. And you're telling me that the most eligible wizard bachelor around is gonna go for his ginger friend's homely sister when he's BFFs with Emma Watson? Not in this universe. I am ambivalent to Ron/Hermione but don't even get me started on Harry/Ginny.

LITTLE WOMEN - I wrote about this last year HERE, but this is really one of the worst offenders on this list and the best example of a fan preferred couple. I'm sorry Louisa May Alcott. You were wrong. Maybe someday (albeit in heaven) like JK, distance will make it clear to her that she made a HUGE MISTAKE. Seriously. I understand the idea of holding out for something that you feel you want/deserve and not wanting to settle, but I think few people would say Christian Bale...I mean Laurie is settling. There's also that whole thing about not knowing what you truly need and being too proud...and I think that's more what came across for me than waiting for the "one." If Professor Bhaer is the "one" everyone is waiting for then that's a truly depressing thought.

SOMETHING BORROWED - This 2011 romantic comedy was sooooo unlikable. Each and every character you couldn't help hope somehow got hit by a bus. Save for one: the one played by the always likable John Krasinski. The writers error here was not just of course letting the wrong characters get together while a better option waited in the wings....but making THAT character the best thing about the story...becoming the new hero to root for. When he SPOILER [highlight to read] gets permanently friend zoned and hinted that later he will end up the worst character in the film....it made me so angry that I wanted every single copy of this film destroyed [/end SPOILER] If you want to hear more rantings and ravings, see my original post HERE

LES MISERABLES - Okay truth be told, I wouldn't actually presume to change the novel or the Broadway show. The characters and lessons learned are there for a reason. That said, for me personally it's hard not to think Marius made a big mistake in picking a girl who to him was simply a pretty face over a loyal and true friend that actually knows and loves you. Obviously if I had my way Eponine and Marius would end up together, but knowing that to be something that would never happen I could perhaps be consoled if even a little more substance was given to his relationship to Cosette.

X-MEN - Boy the screenwriters sure botched relationships in X-3. But then what wasn't botched in that one? Something here about the pairing of Jean and Scott that almost anyone who has seen these films finds somewhat head-scratching. They don't seem to have any affection or chemistry with each other whatsoever. At most the only thing, they seem to pull off is being amiable colleagues. I know love triangles can kind of tend to be this way to give steam to the third angle, and make them seem like the obvious choice. That third angle would be Wolverine, whose chemistry with Jean is electric...making it seem almost nonsensical that a woman would choose her own husband over this sexy beast. Don't you think there's something wrong with that picture?? It should at least be somewhat of a competition! Poor James Marsden.


HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER - What I wrote about with Something Borrowed is basically echoed in How I Met Your Mother. It's bad enough putting characters together that realistically shouldn't be together and make a bad couple, but to do it when they have a good option waiting in the wings really for me is nonsensical. I'm sorry. I'm not sold on Barney and Robin and I never have been (from his side sure, but never hers.) I don't know what woman in her right mind would CHOOSE to be with this man ESPECIALLY when she has the option to be with Ted. Sure she knows Barney on a more personal level which has allowed her to see his softer side, but it's also allowed her to have plenty of time to see all of his red flags. Best answer: she's not in her right mind. I'm sorry but if Ted isn't right for you and Barney is...there's probably something wrong with you. This is kind of what I hate the most about this pairing is that to make it work they've made Robin pretty unlikable and stupid.


HITCH - Here there is no backup character waiting in the wings that would be better for Hitch. In this case, they made the one and only option he had so unlikable that you'd rather the protagonist end up single than to be with this horrible person! Tvtropes.org cites Hitch's love interest Sara as an example of the "Why would they take him back trope" and I couldn't possibly say it better than them: "Although she later gives him a heartfelt apology, Hitch very deservedly refuses to accept it. What should have turned out to be a Crowning Moment of Awesome, ends in a major cliche—when Hitch later goes to her door to beg for her forgiveness! After that, she responds to his begging for forgiveness by basically just deliberately jerking him around for awhile. Just for her own sadistic amusement. It's only after she further breaks his heart and makes him plead a bit more that she finally takes him back." She's the worst and she almost completely derails this pleasant enough rom-com.

NOTTING HILL - Everything I just said about Hitch? Ditto that to Julia Roberts character in Notting Hill. Again there was no runner up to turn to, but Hugh Grant should have just stayed single. Julia Roberts never deserved him but we're supposed to believe so just because she's a famous actress and he'd be "lucky" to have her. If that's luck I plan to break mirrors ritually on every Friday the 13th I come across.

LOVE NEVER DIES - So apparently there's a sequel to Phantom of the Opera and I was coerced into watching it over the weekend. And do you know what I hate almost more than anything? Unnecessary sequels that completely ruin the entire point of the original. (In its defense, the production itself was fine but I sure as heck wasn't sold on the story.) Sure they might have thought it was fan service to finally put the Phantom and Christine together (it wasn't) but to completely ruin other formerly decent characters to do it? *Cough Raoul cough* No thanks. Best listen to the Beatles and Let it Be.



PRETTY IN PINK - Okay I also sufficiently covered this last year in the same post as the Little Women rant, so I won't go into too much detail. I don't particularly wish that she'd chosen any of the love interests in this film so something is wrong. Ducky is the obvious choice since he's a sweet dude, but maybe the flamboyancy could have been toned down a tad to make it a little easier to root for him. Keeping her with Blane didn't have to be a huge mistake either....had they gone to some sort of effort to redeem him besides him complimenting her fugly dress. That compliment (which is a lie btw) is nice but it doesn't erase your deeds dude. It almost just makes you think she should go for the weirdly attractive James Spader and I don't really think that was the point.
HONORABLE MENTION: Any other James Marsden film. 

5 comments:

Sarah said...

Why ANYONE would ever think that the Phantom should be with Christine is crazy. Seriously. He was a murdering, lying, thieving psychopath! Good call on Hitch. He tries to do nothing but sweet things for her, and her sour grapes makes everything go awry. Oh, and you're right, Louisa May Alcott was wrong. As for Harry Potter, I already talked to you about that. However, J.K. Rowling's downfall here is that she hadn't finished the books before the movies were cast. The actors themselves didn't know how it would end when they started it. The result being that there is undeniable chemistry between Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe onscreen. D'oh!

Joey said...

Do secondary characters count? About Notting Hill....his sister should never have ended up with the mayonnaise eating, dirty looking roommate. It should have been the guy who moved on to be the earl of Downton Abby. Badly done Notting Hill. Badly done.

Brittany said...

Agree so much. That is all. I'd mention Twilight in this, but I'm afraid that's in a category all by itself.

Emily said...

I would have mentioned Twilight, but I never touch the stuff. So I can't really speak with much authority on the subject!

Dayna Berg said...

Wasn't Little Women somewhat a Bio? If so, I don't think she could have changed the story. But I agree, Christian Bale is one million times better than the professor.