Review of Happy Endings (2005) by Alexander Z — 07 Dec 2010

Basic premise of Happy Endings: People are lonely and make decisions based upon that feeling. Luckily, like most interconnected storyline type movies, Happy Endings doesn't rely on the unbelievable stupidity of characters to advance the plot (unlike, say, Babel or Crash). However, it does fall prey to the problem of caricatures. Every character just isn't expanded upon enough. The ones that really work here are Tom Arnold, Lisa Kudrow, and Steve Coogan to an extent. The rest are throwaway. A mention must be given to Maggie Gyllenhaal, who does a really good job with what she's given, but the depth of her character just isn't there.

I found myself thinking while watching Happy Endings that it was more dramatized version of a Jerry Springer show. There are few likable characters, and lots of sexual mischief abounds. Also annoying is the sense of self-indulgence present, to the point where a character remarks to another that perhaps Happy Endings would be a great name for a film, and then stops just short of mugging for the camera. Really? Did we need that line? Eventually all our characters go into downward spirals, but of course life works out for the most part, or returns to a somewhat stable drudgery. Some find love, some don't, some are happy, some just live their lives. I get it, Don Roos. Life isn't always a happy ending, even though we all hope for one. Your title is meant to be ironic.

Happy Endings isn't a bad movie, and it avoids a lot of the pitfalls that films of its kind can fall into. I would submit that it's biggest flaw is that it's just not engaging enough.