Connect with us

Movie Reviews

‘Relationship Goals’ Review: Amazon’s Glamorized Book Commercial Almost Looks Like a Real Rom-Com

Published

on

‘Relationship Goals’ Review: Amazon’s Glamorized Book Commercial Almost Looks Like a Real Rom-Com

It didn’t used to be this way, but thanks to the magic of streaming you can now pause anything at any time and pick up on fun little details. I don’t recommend you watch Prime Video’s “Relationship Goals” — at all — but if you do, I recommend you pause it towards the end. There’s a scene where Kelly Rowland, playing a TV executive with a long list of demands for her romantic partners, looks at a multi-page printout of her green flags. It’s full of unreasonable requirements, like having a 401K (in this economy), but also very reasonable demands, like well-groomed nose hair. Not “no” nose hair. Apparently she likes nose hair. She just needs it well-groomed. Fair enough.

In a halfway decent universe, this could have been the only interesting thing about “Relationship Goals,” a conventional, boring, forgettable romantic comedy if ever I’ve seen one. But we don’t live in a halfway decent universe. We live in one where this conventional, boring, forgettable romantic comedy isn’t even a romantic comedy. It’s a shameless promotion for a book about relationship advice, released on a streaming service that also happens to sell the book. It even features lines like, “This story hit so hard I Amazoned a copy of ‘Relationship Goals’ right away.”

If you haven’t heard of it, “Relationship Goals” is a book by Pastor Michael Todd which, if this movie is any indication, is full of mind-blowing romantic self-help tips like, if you’re not dating people you like, try dating different people, or maybe just try being single for a while. And hey, that’s not bad advice, it’s just really obvious advice. Then again it also compares people who date a lot, without a specific relationship goal, to chicken nuggets, because nobody wants to eat chicken nuggets if everyone’s touched them first. I’d like to think the book is more thoughtful and less condescending than that, but I remind you that this is a feature-length commercial for that book, and this is how they’re selling it. So maybe not?

“Relationship Goals” stars Kelly Rowland as Leah, a TV producer on a hit morning news show. She expects a big promotion after her boss retires but, surprise-surprise, the network wants her to compete with a new hire, Jarrett (Cliff “Method Man” Smith), who just happens to be the ex-boyfriend who cheated on her years ago. They’re assigned to work on a Valentine’s Day segment together — yes, together, as if that could possibly prove one is more qualified than the other — and it’s about the book “Relationship Goals,” which Jarrett says changed his life. Unlike Jarrett, Leah doesn’t want to make a puff piece commercial, which is the funniest thing about this “comedy” because that’s obviously all this is. All of it.

“Relationship Goals” runs through all the romantic comedy rhythms without ever settling on a beat. Rowland and Smith are likable performers but their banter is strained, and the film can’t settle on a structure that forces them to interact. Early in the movie they get trapped in Oklahoma, so they have to drive six hours to another airport to get back to the studio. You’d think that would be a decent framework for a rom-com. It’s familiar, but tried-and-true. Instead, we just get one brief interaction in a car, one forced gag about diner food and then they’re back home. The film set up a bit and then abandoned anything resembling a bit. Again, this is supposed to be a romantic comedy. We’re literally here for the bits. More bits, please. Why did you abandon the bits?

Advertisement

There’s a supporting cast in “Relationship Goals,” including a best friend who’s single and desperate (Annie Gonzalez) and another best friend who’s in a long-term relationship with no marriage prospects (Robin Thede). They exist to have problems that are easily solved by the book “Relationship Goals,” because the protagonists can’t get together until the end, and by itself that wouldn’t make it look like “Relationship Goals” has quick-fix solutions to all your romantic needs. And this movie really wants you to think it’s the perfect quick-fix.

But those characters also exist because “Relationship Goals” is following the template set forth by “Think Like a Man,” another rom-com based on and explicitly about a real-life romantic advice book. “Think Like a Man” was also a shameless commercial but it did, at least, try to be a very good commercial. “Think Like a Man” had a variety of romantic subplots that it sold with a great cast, solid dialogue and some cinematic oomph. “Relationship Goals” isn’t trying to convince us it’s a real film, it’s only doing the book commercial part. Which means it’s not even a good book commercial.

If you look back at Leah’s list of romantic requirements you’ll notice that one of them is “Enjoys film.” She tears these pages up, by the way, presumably because by that point Leah — and the movie itself — has long since given up on the concept of cinema. “Relationship Goals” isn’t as insulting as Prime Video’s “War of the Worlds,” in which the planet was literally saved by two Amazon purchases and the wonder of flying Amazon drones, but then very few films are, so that’s not a useful comparison. It’s enough that this film is insulting, unconvincing, unfunny, unromantic, and, worst of all, at least to the Amazon executives, it doesn’t even make you want to buy the damn book.

"The AI Doc: Or How I Became an Apocaloptimist" (Credit: Courtesy of Focus Features)

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

‘Red Rocks’ Review: Weirdo, Cliff-Jumping Kiddies Are the Focus of Bruno Dumont’s Latest Experiment

Published

on

‘Red Rocks’ Review: Weirdo, Cliff-Jumping Kiddies Are the Focus of Bruno Dumont’s Latest Experiment

From “The 400 Blows” to “The Florida Project,” kids have made fascinating cinematic subjects. Even if they’re working from scripts, there’s always the sense that they’re not entirely acting — that they can’t help but simply be themselves. The French director Bruno Dumont, a former philosophy professor who broke into Cannes nearly 30 years ago with his stark feature debut “The Life of Jesus,” has gravitated towards the raw naturalism of youngsters in the past. See “Li’l Quinquin” from 2014, and his musical curios about France’s patron saint “Jeannette,” (2017) and “Joan of Arc” (2019), all three of which find a strange, startling profundity in ragtag rugrats, say, debating theology or blankly witnessing acts of violence. 

Childhood, for Dumont, isn’t a stage of pure innocence, but a transition period where adult behaviors are tried on by little ones who don’t entirely know what they mean, or what the stakes are. Such is the case with his latest feature, “Red Rocks,” which involves children roughly between the ages of five and seven jumping off cliffs, riding mini motorcycles and partaking in gang warfare — or its pre-verbal equivalent. Long, static, mostly wordless takes will make these activities seem less eventful than they sound. Patient arthouse viewers, however, will find much to chew on here as a subtly cerebral film about small bodies unsettlingly, hilariously navigating a big, violent world.

Blending documentary-style observation and a Romeo and Juliet framing device, “Red Rocks” — which premiered in the Cannes Directors’ Fortnight program — is scaled-back for Dumont compared to his 2021 Cannes competition entry “France,” a media satire starring Léa Seydoux, and last year’s “The Empire,” a critically divisive “Star Wars” spoof that premiered at the Berlinale.

Twitchy, blond tyke Géo (Kaylon Lancel) and his posse (Louise Podolski and Mohamed Coly) meet another trio of tinies while enjoying their favorite activity: scaling rock formations and taking (seemingly quite dangerous!) plunges into the ocean waters below. One member of the opposing crew, Eva (Kelsie Verdeilles), takes a liking to Géo, though their romance is hampered by Eva’s other boyfriend B (Alessandro Piquera). Not that romance, here, means anything beyond hand-holding and giggling while awkwardly staring into each other’s eyes. 

Cinematographer Carlos Alfonso Corral (co-producer of Roberto Minervini’s “The Damned”) alternates between fish-bowl closeups of the children’s faces and extreme wide shots of the craggy, coastal landscape. The effect is a bit like watching a tripped-out version of “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” or “Thomas & Friends,” the Mediterranean setting — complete with arched viaducts and train tracks —miniaturized into a kind of fantasy playground for its band of tots to roam around freely.

Advertisement

A fair share of camera tricks and strategic angles make the kids’ climbing stunts look significantly riskier, though in a masterclass following the premiere, Dumont admitted to a degree of recklessness, choosing to shoot many of the film’s scenes in Italy as opposed to France, because of filming laws in the latter country pertaining to minors. In this Gallic Neverland, there’s not a safety helmet (or nervous parent) in sight, which admittedly adds to the film’s feral energy. Their twiggy legs and bony frames exposed in bathing suits, the kids do indeed look extra vulnerable within the film’s savage landscape. That’s precisely Dumont’s intention — freedom is fun and scary — but the choice is sure to raise eyebrows among critics of the director, who has historically been called out for his work with nonprofessional actors. 

The star-crossed lovers drama is mostly a justification to watch the kids play and pull weird and mesmerizing expressions, which turns repetitive over the film’s slim 90-minute runtime. Still, there’s amusement and electricity in their physicalities and wry antics. Working, again, at the boundary between the sublime and the silly, Dumont nevertheless manages to stake out new territory with this alien portrait of childhood. This may be something of a transitional work for a director who tends to shape-shift, but you’ve got to hand it to a guy unafraid to experiment. 

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘The End of It’ Review: Rebecca Hall, Gael García Bernal and Beanie Feldstein in a Compellingly Quirky, if Overstretched, Sci-Fi Exercise

Published

on

‘The End of It’ Review: Rebecca Hall, Gael García Bernal and Beanie Feldstein in a Compellingly Quirky, if Overstretched, Sci-Fi Exercise

The always eminently watchable Rebecca Hall (The Man I Love, TV’s The Beauty) both anchors and buoys the tonally irregular but consistently thoughtful and compelling sci-fi comedy-drama The End of It, a feature debut for Catalan writer-director Maria Martinez Bayona.

Offering a near future that’s creepily plausible, resonant with recent headlines and nicely underplayed in terms of design, this posits Hall as Claire, a 250-year-old artist who’s kept looking like an elegant 30something thanks to sophisticated blood dialysis techniques and other kinds of high-tech, vaguely defined wizardry, available to a very select few.

The End of It

The Bottom Line

Augurs a potentially interesting career.

Advertisement

Venue: Cannes Film Festival (Cannes Premiere)
Cast: Rebecca Hall, Gael Garcia Bernal, Noomi Rapace, Beanie Feldstein
Director/screenwriter: Maria Martinez Bayona

2 hours 22 minutes

However, when Claire grows bored with an effectively immortal life and chooses to die, her husband Diego (Gael García Bernal), 180-year-old daughter Martha (Noomi Rapace), and android personal assistant Sarah (Beanie Feldstein) react in various ways, ranging from supportive to angry. Running an attenuated 142-minutes, this feels slightly flawed by a script that doesn’t quite know how to play out its endgame and erupts with jarring flashes of spongey, overegged satire. Still, the performances and visuals consistently add value, and if this doesn’t sell many tickets IRL, it should haul in clicks as a streaming entity.

Shot mostly in the Canary Islands with the region’s searing, glaring Tropic-of-Cancer-adjacent light, freakishly black, volcanic soil and groovy mid-century-modernist buildings, the film suggests a future where the worst climactic disasters have been avoided. That, or the people we meet here are wealthy enough to have found a cushy little enclave to live forever without a care in the world. It seems they’re part of the select few, members of a vaguely alluded-to world order that provides the means to exist in a state of permanent, hedonistic ennui.

Advertisement

But the only way to get in on this immortality gig, or to be granted permission to have a baby, is for someone else to die. And since no one expires from, say, cancer or other now-curable diseases, and bones and organs can be replaced like car parts with artificial spares, people only pass when involved in freak accidents…or take their own lives.

On the occasion of her 250th birthday (she gets a cake with so many candles she can barely be bothered to blow them out), Claire is in a funk and just not enjoying any of this anymore. Having just replaced her last remaining natural bone, she takes stock. Years ago, she was an acclaimed artist whose work was a bit avant-garde and challenging. Now she designs jewelry, a remunerative but not very intellectually rewarding pursuit. (This plot point is a bit mean to jewelry designers.) Suffering an acute case of anhedonia, she decides that she will no longer have her blood work every day or any other kind of life-extending treatment and instead will just let nature take its course.

As grey hairs appear and other augurs of age become visible, Claire contends with the varied reactions of her small social circle. She couldn’t care less about the assorted colorful acquaintances who attended her birthday party, a cohort clad in an assortment of semi-minimalist clothes with funky little details and interestingly textured textiles, as if dressed in a mix of Comme des Garçons and Cos. (Costume designer Pau Auli’s work throughout is both witty and oddly covetable with its precise tailoring and subtle color palette.)

But it is more upsetting that Diego, her husband of many years, doesn’t get her reasoning at all, or even sees this as a personal rejection. Sarah, Claire’s relentlessly perky robot sidekick, similarly cannot compute why Claire would wish to undermine Sarah’s prime directive, to keep Claire alive. But she’ll do whatever it takes to keep her mistress happy, like some kind of humanoid golden retriever.

Only her daughter Martha, who shows up suddenly, having not seen her mother in 50 years, seems at peace with Claire’s decision. That turns out to be because she thinks this may be her chance to take Claire’s place as a breeding female in their society and has brought along an android baby to practice on, like some kind of 23rd century Tamagotchi that can be switched off and recharged whenever necessary.

Advertisement

Prone to wearing clothes that suggest an overgrown pre-teen herself, all frills, flounces and bright colors, Martha doesn’t look like great maternal material to Claire, although this judgmental attitude may be evidence of her own maternal deficiencies. The peevish sparring between the two of them gets a comic push from the fact that the two actors are very close in age (Hall is three years younger than Rapace), but like so many parents and children they remain stuck in a dynamic that formed sometime in adolescence and has never been outgrown.

The digs at the pretensions of artists, channeled through Claire’s decision to make her death a public spectacle in order to secure some future fame, are less amusing here because the blows never seem to quite connect with their targets. Also, one begins to suspect that a small budget prohibited the filmmakers from showing a wider view of this society, which also dampens any parodic purpose. Claire’s elective death therefore remains a problematic choice for some viewers, an act of vainglorious selfishness from a woman who was never terribly nice to begin with.

It’s lucky she’s played by Hall, who endows Claire with a spiky sort of wit and charisma, while her performance in the film’s final minutes packs a considerable emotional wallop and pathos to spare. The impact of that shocking final scene is sufficient to send viewers out feeling enervated after what’s been a pretty desultory final act. But even with these flaws, The End of It looks like it marks the beginning of an interesting career for its young writer-director, a talent with a strong visual sensibility and skills with actors.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review | Remarkably Bright Creature

Published

on

Movie Review | Remarkably Bright Creature

Remarkably Bright Creature (Photo – Netflix)

“I’d like to be under the sea in an octopus’s garden…”

Remarkably Bright Creature
Directed by Olivia Newman – 2026
Reviewed by Garrett Rowlan

Whenever you have a lyric from a C-list Beatle song running through your head while watching a movie, it’s not a good sign.

But halfway through Remarkably Bright Creatures, a new film starring Sally Fields, those words earwormed their way into my head, replacing, I fear, the heartwarming sentiment I was expected to feel.

Based on a popular novel, Remarkably Bright Creatures—or RBC hereafter—is narrated by a captive octopus named Marcellus, who makes observations from his tank in a seaside Washington town.

Advertisement

The digitally animated creature, voiced by Alfred Molina in a flat tone that itself sounds half-submerged, spends his days hiding from the grasping eyes and fingerprints of schoolchildren on field trips. By night, he communicates through touch and glance with the janitor, Tova Sullivan, played by Sally Fields, a widow with a tragic past. She hobbles around on a sprained ankle and debates whether to move into a retirement facility.

As you might guess, RBC is slight on dramatic material, relying instead on the commentary of Marcellus, the aging octopus; Tova’s interactions with her octogenarian friends; and the arrival in town of a struggling musician seeking the father he never knew.

The film reminded me of those BBC-produced cozy mysteries I’ve become fond of renting from the Pasadena Public Library: small-town atmospheres filled with chumminess and colorful characters. Those mysteries, however, have an unsolved crime to propel the plot. Aside from the struggling musician’s attempt to locate his wealthy, incognito biological father, RBC leaves the viewer with little to chew on—or, I suppose, suck on. Marcellus’s eight arms and clinging suckers not only allow him to move in unique ways, but also to comment on the other characters from the vantage of his tank, a POV oddity that becomes one of the film’s more troubling anomalies.

As usual with this geezer genre, there’s the sobering apprehension of familiar faces, Kathy Baker and Joan Chen in this case, whose wrinkles and tissue breakdown reminded me of my own softening jawline. Colm Meaney, playing a former Grateful Dead fanatic turned coffee-shop owner, serves as Sally Fields’s love interest; his Irish brogue further evokes those BBC cozies.

“She lives in a larger tank than me,” observes Marcellus of the fussy attendant. His periodic comments sprinkle the plot, easing along our understanding of the characters until the metaphorical enclosure around Sally Fields dissolves as she takes the aging Marcellus to the seashore and returns him to his own octopus’s garden.

Advertisement

What the ultimate public reception of RBC will be, I don’t know. I wouldn’t have thought Project Hail Mary, with its spidery co-star in a beach-ball enclosure, would be popular either, so I suppose there’s hope yet for the movie and its slithering protagonist.

> Streaming on Netflix.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending