I’m lukewarm about it.
The Mother/Daughter age difference is a real miss. I agree with what was said upthread that there ought to be more opportunities for older actresses, it’s just that this movie shouldn’t have been one of them. An unplanned pregnancy at 30 (which would still shave 10yrs off Streep’s age- but she can pull that off), doesn’t capture the “magical carefree days of youth” element of the setting of the backstory that has been laid out.
Colin Firth, 48 but on film I can accept him as young as 40, should have been the mean by which the casting was measured.
Another minor quibble, in anything other than an Adam Sandler movie I am just plain tired of the easy “go to” joke of showing a photo of a character 20years prior to the main plot in which some funny hair and some funny clothes are slapped on the actor who looks every bit as old as he does in the current action of the plot. “ha ha, look at Colin Firth in the funny wig! Look at Pierce Brosnan in the funny wig!” At least allow the professionals in the costume and make-up departments to attempt to do a decent job so that the action of the film is not ground to a halt for a cheap laugh. Later in the film the three dads are shown in photos with Meryl Streep. These photos are faded and washed out and were doctored perfectly well. It’s the photos earlier in the film, when the guys are introduced that are ridiculous.
More to the point, doing a musical with pre-existing songs (and I critiqued Across the Universe in the same way) is crippled by the inherent weakness that the songs were not written with the purpose of advancing a plot. Many of the complaints seem to have to do with loose ends and poorly developed characters. Fact is there’s really very little room in the script to advance those loose ends and underdeveloped characters because every musical sequence eats up 3 to 6 minutes.
And I’ll go one further with the complaint about the late revelation that Colin Firth’s character was gay and add that I found it mildly offensive. Of all the romantic couplings that come at the end of the film, each of them had at least a little bit of a set-up, even if that set-up relied upon the audience knowing the two characters well enough as individuals as to accept that they would make a good couple. There was a tiny bit of foreshadowing that Harry was gay in a conversation between him and Bill on the boat- but that seemed more of a misunderstanding on Bill’s part, and that’s how I read it. The offensive part is that when he is revealed to be gay, we as the audience are immediately expected to accept his love affair with a hot Greek guy who we’ve never seen before, a character who we don’t know at all as an individual let alone how their relationship developed. It’s offensive in that it is presented like it doesn’t at all matter and that we are expected to just go with it- these are after all gay men, all that needs be known is that Harry gay, he met another gay guy who happens to be hot, so obviously they’re going to get it on- it’s not like gay men are fully actualized human beings who form deep relationships, no! all you need to know is hot gay guy + hot gay guy = gay coupling.
In a musical for which the songs were specifically written, the songs end up advancing the plot and developing the characters (or they do in a good musical anyway).
On top of that, once a catalog of songs has been chosen it ends up being difficult to resist the temptation to include “favorites” regardless of whether or not they fit in the storyline. Example: the only reason, the only reason Donna was having money troubles was so they could include “Money Money Money”, and the money troubles were never again revisited- as if they never existed in the first place. The only reason the bachelor party invaded the hen party was so they could do “Gimme Gimme Gimme”. And, honestly, even having watched the film- without dozing off or leaving for bathroom break- I still can’t tell you how they fit in “Dancing Queen” or “Chiquitita”, I sat there and watched the scene unfold and suddenly the song popped in.
Really, this is my biggest complaint. I happen to love ABBA and think all those songs are wonderful. But so much squirming was required to fit them into the story that I couldn’t help finding myself squirming along through the whole belabored process.
On a more positive note, although “Does Your Mother Know” definitely fits into the category of being shoved into the story like a square peg in a round hole, I liked the choice to change the gender and have it performed by a woman (for those less familiar with ABBA: although ABBA’s most well-known songs are sung by the quartet’s two female vocalists, “Does Your Mother Know” was sung by Björn, one of the bjoys.) Now, take any good idea and hand it to Christine Baranski and suddenly that good idea becomes a killer idea. I’ve been in awe of Baranski ever since the sitcom Cybill. That woman should be cast in everything on stage and screen ever. I just about flipped when she didn’t get to sing in Chicago (her character has a song, but it was cut from the film, preproduction I believe).
The movie was fun, the leads were likable, and the songs were good, and Baranski’s performance nearly balanced out everything that I disliked about the movie as a whole, so all in all it was a pleasant enough way to spend two hours.
Interesting sidenote: Amanda Seyfried plays a younger character on Big Love but the character shows a maturity and worldliness beyond her years. Her character in Mamma Mia! is a few years older but much more wide-eyed and naive.
Watching Big Love, I’ve always found her very attractive. Watching Mamma Mia! I could certainly appreciate her beauty, but I couldn’t personally find her attractive because I watched her thinking of her as a young girl not as a young woman.
Just interesting I thought since her Big Love character is younger than her Mamma Mia! character.
And if anyone wants to call me creepy, Amanda Seyfried is 23, I am 33. Certainly doesn’t mean you can’t call me creepy- just filling out the picture for you.
