By Zack Gill
Staff Writer
The romantic comedy “Love and Other Drugs” has all of the ingredients necessary for a good film: a capable director and an exceptional cast. However, it fails to deliver on nearly every front.
“Love and Other Drugs” is essentially an unfocused mess.Despite a good performance from Anne Hathaway and surprisingly biting commentary on the pharmaceutical industry, the film attempts to say something original, but instead relies on stock comedy-relief characters and a predictable plot.
The film takes place in 1996, when ladies’ man Jamie (Jake Gyllenhaal) takes a job as a pharmaceutical rep for corporate giant Pfizer. After attempting to sway a doctor into switching medications, he meets Maggie (Anne Hathaway), a bohemian artist with Parkinson’s Disease.
Hathaway and Gyllenhaal then partake in a casual affair that eventually turns into a full-fledged relationship, while the film chronicles Gyllenhaal’s rise in the hierarchy of Ohio River Valley pharmaceuticals via the sale of the new miracle drug, Viagra.
There’s a lot going on in the film, which is its first major problem. The film never cleanly settles into one genre or focuses on a single subject. It starts out as a dirty comedy, moves into satire, and then settles into romantic-comedy tropes. This wouldn’t be a problem if each part was effective, but only the insights of the pharmaceutical corporation remain memorable. It’s a shame that they’re quickly brushed aside so we can watch Gyllenhaal and Hathaway stare at each other.
That’s not to insult the romantic-comedy genre as a whole; there are some wonderful, substantial romantic-comedies out there. However, it’s disappointing to see original material (the pharmaceuticals plot) put down upon for the fulfillment of clichés: the diseased woman, afraid to open up to the lazy wunderkind. The bulk of “Love and Other Drugs” has been done before and done better, too.
“Love and Other Drugs” is perhaps the first film from director and screenwriter Edward Zwick without guns. Known for his violent fare, such as “Blood Diamond” and “The Last Samurai,” Zwick brings years of experience to a genre he hasn’t really explored since the 1990s, when he produced groundbreaking television shows like “thirtysomething” and “My So-Called Life.” However, Zwick fails to bring the visual flair of his past films or the good writing of his television to “Love and Other Drugs.”
The most noteworthy aspect of the film is Hathaway’s performance. Although the film’s script is sub par, her performance contains a level of intensity and believability surprising for someone as young she is. She manages to bring a cruel, selfish character to likability, and that’s no easy feat.
Gyllenhaal, whose career has been inconsistent, gives a perfectly average performance here – his presence isn’t embarrassing, but it won’t exactly get him the award season consideration the film was reputed to supply before its release.
“Love and Other Drugs” is, simply put, a misfire. Everything original about it is quickly buried in derivative, sentimental tripe. It’s needless to say that Hathaway, and probably Zwick, will go on to create much better films. “Love and Other Drugs” is rater R and is playing in theatres nationwide.
Leave a Reply