Review of I Could Never Be Your Woman (2007) by Eric F — 10 Aug 2008

Due to financial mismanagement, this film had been in limbo for 2 or 3 years after it had initially been filmed. After having been released straight to DVD earlier this year, director Amy Heckerling made it apparent that some of the references may be dated since it was written so long ago. However, "dated" is an understatement, and these pop culture references wouldn't have been any more out of date in 2005. Seriously, referencing Ricky Martin, Britney Spears, and Screech from Saved by the Bell in 2005? Are you kidding me? While parts of the film were charming and it was certainly never boring, I was completely offended by how hypocritical and lousily written this was.

Rosie (Michelle Pfeiffer) is a writer/producer for a popular teenybopper television series called "You Go Girl". However, due to slipping ratings, the search starts for a new young face to liven things up. Enter Adam (Paul Rudd), who is charming and the perfect guy. Rosie develops a crush on him and he gets the gig, and although he initially doesn't get along with certain members of the cast, he becomes a star who is offered is own series.

Rosie and Adam begin to date, however Rosie feels uncomfortable at dance clubs and in public due to their age difference. Eventually, about half way through the movie, she breaks up with Adam. Adam, however, remains persistent and tries to win her back and teach her that age has nothing to do with inner beauty. Isn't that sweet? The other significant relationship in the film is between Rosie and her daughter, Izzie (Saoirse Ronan from Atonement), who has just hit puberty and wants to be noticed by a guy at her school.

What offended me so much about this film was the fact that Rosie was essentially meant to come across as your "average middle aged woman". However, Michelle Pfeiffer has only become more beautiful with age. She is far from average. When Rosie was met with disgusted looks as she walked into the club, it became so strikingly apparent that this wasn't the role for her. In reality, people's jaws would've dropped. Also, at one point Adam's character claims that he doesn't feel he's attractive, and he's also meant to be your "average nice guy". So, yes, let's recap. Michelle Pfeiffer and Paul Rudd are supposed to be your answer to protest against beautiful people who get what they want. Why on Earth do you cast two beautiful, charismatic, and lovable stars for those roles? This is a feminist film, yet at the same time it teaches older women that they have to have the genetics of Michelle Pfeiffer to find love after a divorce. It's as hypocritical as a beautiful young actress like America Ferrera playing "Ugly Betty".

Come to think about it, this may be one of the more idealized films i've ever seen. It was incredibly ironic that the sitcom they're shooting in the film is no less bright than the lighting in the film itself. Not to mention that the dialogue is just as forced, lame, and unbelievable. I never once believed that there was a spark between the two leads whatsoever, mostly due to a complete lack in development in Adam's character.

As I said before, the pop culture references are completely embarrassing and had to have been excruciating to work with for everybody involved. It's depressing as this is the writer who brought us "Clueless", one of the more hip and "in touch" films of the 90's. Now, in 2007, it's apparent that Heckerling couldn't be anymore out of touch. Also, I was quite disappointed to see a young girl like Saoirse being fed lines where she has to sing a song about how it's moronic that Bush is president. First of all, keep political views out of film for God's sake as Bush-bashing has become so damn tiresome; and second of all, don't have a young girl sing political protests. This is what drives me nuts about the today's media - kids unknowingly bashing the president because that's what they're told to do. Whether he's a good president or not is completely irrelevant. It's just ethically wrong.

While this entire "review" has been a rant about the writing of the film, it does have it's moments. Paul Rudd lights up the screen as always, and the opening credits were very sharp and legitimately funny. However, overall, I think this film is a great example on why 50-year-old women shouldn't be writing to impress 11-year-olds. It's embarrassing.