Review – Not Another Happy Ending
17 March 2014
Regarding the plot and script, the film
made that all too common mistake of revealing too much in the trailer, making
it pretty easy to guess where everything was heading. There were plenty of
clichés scattered throughout, for instance, the entire back story concerning
Jane’s father. The back story does give her more depth as a character, which is
always a good thing, but it was a plot line that has been used a million times
before. A predictable plot isn’t always a bad thing though, as sometimes I’m in
the mood for a light, easy film, without too much emotional drama or mental
work required. The use of Jane’s writing career and the publishing industry made
it a bit different however, as I haven’t seen that many films about the topic
before. The slight twist at the end certainly caught me off guard though, but since
it turned out to not really be a twist, it wound up feeling like a cheap attempt
at avoiding the clichéd ending, which was redundant when it didn’t avoid it at
all. Ultimately though, the plot is decent, predictable but plausible, with
characters who are consistent in their behaviours.
Warning: minor spoilers ahead
I had mixed feelings about Not Another Happy Ending. Before
watching I was unsure whether it would be a typical romantic comedy, or
something a little more indie and different; it turned out to be the former. Being
about literature, set in Scotland and having Karen Gillan were good selling
points for me, and it was decent, but nothing particularly outstanding.
watching I was unsure whether it would be a typical romantic comedy, or
something a little more indie and different; it turned out to be the former. Being
about literature, set in Scotland and having Karen Gillan were good selling
points for me, and it was decent, but nothing particularly outstanding.
 |
| (Source) |
made that all too common mistake of revealing too much in the trailer, making
it pretty easy to guess where everything was heading. There were plenty of
clichés scattered throughout, for instance, the entire back story concerning
Jane’s father. The back story does give her more depth as a character, which is
always a good thing, but it was a plot line that has been used a million times
before. A predictable plot isn’t always a bad thing though, as sometimes I’m in
the mood for a light, easy film, without too much emotional drama or mental
work required. The use of Jane’s writing career and the publishing industry made
it a bit different however, as I haven’t seen that many films about the topic
before. The slight twist at the end certainly caught me off guard though, but since
it turned out to not really be a twist, it wound up feeling like a cheap attempt
at avoiding the clichéd ending, which was redundant when it didn’t avoid it at
all. Ultimately though, the plot is decent, predictable but plausible, with
characters who are consistent in their behaviours.
My biggest issue was in the script/directing
choice made near the beginning, when we are seeing the early period of Jane and
Tom’s relationship developing. The entire sequence plays out in a montage
lasting only a few minutes, which doesn’t give nearly enough insight into the
dynamics of their relationship. Montages can be useful for showing time
passing, but this one came too early in the plot, or at least needed to be
supplemented with a few more fully developed scenes. It made their relationship
difficult to understand, especially the falling out that followed so soon
afterwards. Over the course of the film, things became clearer, but starting so
hazily was not a good move.
choice made near the beginning, when we are seeing the early period of Jane and
Tom’s relationship developing. The entire sequence plays out in a montage
lasting only a few minutes, which doesn’t give nearly enough insight into the
dynamics of their relationship. Montages can be useful for showing time
passing, but this one came too early in the plot, or at least needed to be
supplemented with a few more fully developed scenes. It made their relationship
difficult to understand, especially the falling out that followed so soon
afterwards. Over the course of the film, things became clearer, but starting so
hazily was not a good move.
The acting was pretty solid throughout the
film though. Karen Gillan did not disappoint, playing Jane as pensive and
emotional, but also quirky and awkward, bringing the character to life brightly
enough to match her colourful wardrobe. Stanley Weber, as Tom, matched her in
emotional intensity and the scenes where these characters clash are certainly
their best. The exploration of cultural differences between their characters’
nationalities also added an extra dimension to the film. At times I got rather
irritated with both characters, being rather too serious and overdramatic for
my liking much of the time, but you can’t expect to like everybody all the
time, and that includes fictional characters. I adored Darsie, Amy Mason playing
her blunt honesty, wit and sarcasm excellently; a breath of fresh air to contrast
with Jane’s melancholic tendencies, although her character’s role as a
hallucination was a little jarring in a film that I assumed to be entirely realistic
until she appeared. Iain de Caestecker, as Roddy, is brilliant in providing
comic relief in spades, countering the intensity of the lead roles, and had me
cracking up for many of his scenes, especially when “teaching” his class. My
only complaint was that his interaction with Nicola, played by the wonderful Freya
Mavor, was not utilised enough, nor was the character of Nicola overall. If
Jane and Tom’s beginnings were rushed, Roddy and Nicola’s were almost skipped
entirely.
film though. Karen Gillan did not disappoint, playing Jane as pensive and
emotional, but also quirky and awkward, bringing the character to life brightly
enough to match her colourful wardrobe. Stanley Weber, as Tom, matched her in
emotional intensity and the scenes where these characters clash are certainly
their best. The exploration of cultural differences between their characters’
nationalities also added an extra dimension to the film. At times I got rather
irritated with both characters, being rather too serious and overdramatic for
my liking much of the time, but you can’t expect to like everybody all the
time, and that includes fictional characters. I adored Darsie, Amy Mason playing
her blunt honesty, wit and sarcasm excellently; a breath of fresh air to contrast
with Jane’s melancholic tendencies, although her character’s role as a
hallucination was a little jarring in a film that I assumed to be entirely realistic
until she appeared. Iain de Caestecker, as Roddy, is brilliant in providing
comic relief in spades, countering the intensity of the lead roles, and had me
cracking up for many of his scenes, especially when “teaching” his class. My
only complaint was that his interaction with Nicola, played by the wonderful Freya
Mavor, was not utilised enough, nor was the character of Nicola overall. If
Jane and Tom’s beginnings were rushed, Roddy and Nicola’s were almost skipped
entirely.
Overall, this is an enjoyable film, albeit
nothing special. It has a few defining traits, in an attempt to be different, such
as the Scottish setting, the literary backdrop and the twist-that’s-not-really-a-twist
but you certainly won’t see coming, but the general plot is still easy enough
to figure out. However, the flaws in the plot are tempered with a cast that is
strong and convincing. A good choice if you’re in the mood for an easy watch,
peppered with drama, romance and comedy.
nothing special. It has a few defining traits, in an attempt to be different, such
as the Scottish setting, the literary backdrop and the twist-that’s-not-really-a-twist
but you certainly won’t see coming, but the general plot is still easy enough
to figure out. However, the flaws in the plot are tempered with a cast that is
strong and convincing. A good choice if you’re in the mood for an easy watch,
peppered with drama, romance and comedy.
