Dinner with Friends

Two couples, upper middle class and no financial problems: four friends. They marry at about the same time, each have two kids, they spend a lot of time together, *best* friends... And then, one of them split up.

The movie, by the way of dialogs, shows how each of the four's world is shaken up, as their unspoken contract, namely, to raise their kids together, to grow old together, is broken. Questions: Whose fault is the breakup, husband's or wife's? Which couple has it right: those, who stick to marriage or those who break out of the rut? Who has the right to judge: those who keep to their marriage vows, or those who acknowledge that their relationship has been a lie? Can we demand that our friends always tell us the truth? How do we react when our closest friends question the unspoken foundations of our lives? The movie follows the actions and reactions of our characters in this situation. Nobody is right, nobody is wrong. In a way, everybody is right. That is what makes the movie interesting. The men act the way men act, and the women act the way women act. The questions are not really answered, they are debated, and the movie shows that completely grown-up people are really unable to answer them.

I liked the performances of the actors. Andie McDowell was as beautiful as she always is. I also liked the two guys. The environment, the camera, etc. seemed just right. But the most interesting were the dialogs. So, if you like movies in which people investigate themselves, their lives, and their relationships, without giving you a definite answer what to do, you may enjoy this movie.

The opening scene of this film is very good, with equal parts humor, pathos, agony and sympathy. Problem is, it gets progressively worse as it goes along, and in the end, it just ... ends. It's as if the script writer(s) indiscriminately decided that it was a good place to write "The End" and say the hell with it.

I haven't seen a movie this talky since "My Dinner with Andre." There the similarity between the two movies ends, though, because the dialogue in this movie is stilted, banal, predictable, and most of all, deadly dull. I don't think that either McDowell or Quaid were up to these roles; though I don't think the best actors imaginable could have breathed a lot of life into them. But these two come off almost as automatons, shifting emotional gears right on cue, just the way you expect them to. Like it's...it's...you know what it reminded me of? Tim Allen and Patricia Richardson in one of their "serious" moments in "Home Improvement." "OK, first 13 seconds of anger, then 22 seconds of self-defense, then a quick joke, 18 seconds of resolution, another joke, a hug, a kiss, and...CUT! And that's a wrap." I can only be glad that Quaid and McDowell don't talk to an avuncular next-door neighbor over a fence.

Clearly we're supposed to see the friends who are split up as the outwardly "perfect" people, charming, good-looking, bragging about the great sex with their new partners, rich, insisting that they're happy, but clearly we're supposed to identify with McDowell and Quaid, the introspective, homey couple who wonder if the fires have gone cold, but see, it's the very wondering that proves the fires *haven't* gone cold. I think.

And after all of the wrangling and the wrenching revelations and the anguished talk and the furrowed brows and the bitten lower lips, the whole thing is resolved by Quaid climbing on top of McDowell and the lights go out. All they needed was a little old-fashioned, introspective, homey sex. Not the wild, exotic, enjoyable kind, just the dull routine kind. In the picture-perfect bed in the picture-perfect bedroom of their picture-perfect cottage in picture-perfect Martha's Vineyard, with their picture-perfect sons asleep and all's well with the world. What seemed like acute marital appendicitis proved to be just a bit of gas.

Burp.

No character makes sense, everybody is wrong. Gabe and especially the ultra conservative Karen constantly temper in their friend's decisions, which are really none of their business (as if my best friend had a right to tell me who I should be with or what my goals and principles in life should be). Tom on the other hand is a self-righteous bastard who always thinks of himself as the victim. He loves talking about himself and doesn't accept anyone else's opinion. And Beth, well, she's just an unbelievably annoying person. I could see how anyone would want to leave her.

A movie about failed marriages and love should show how nobody is wrong and everybody is right. The thing is, none of the four characters here is believable and the dialog is painful at times. From the first time Tom and Beth meet it's hard to believe that the two of them are even attracted to each other. It's also hard to believe that somebody as far removed from reality as Karen is living on this planet and happily married.

Nope, the writers got it all wrong and not even the cast can save this movie. Sorry.

TV may be mostly a wasteland these days, but every once in a while, a fine original film shows up on the tube. `Dinner With Friends' is certainly in that category. It takes the viewer deeply into the relationship between two couples and within each. They were best friends until one of the marriages hits the rocks. We see each side of that split and how it affects the other couple. Initially, sides seem to be taken along gender lines, but that reverses as each member of the separating couple finds new relationships. Is it fatal to the other marriage? Watch and see.