A washed up singer is given a couple days to compose a chart-topping hit for an aspiring teen sensation. Though he's never written a decent lyric in his life, he sparks with an offbeat younger woman with a flair for words.
A lonely doctor who once occupied an unusual lakeside home begins exchanging love letters with its former resident, a frustrated architect. They must try to unravel the mystery behind their extraordinary romance before it's too late.
Benjamin Barry is an advertising executive and ladies' man who, to win a big campaign, bets that he can make a woman fall in love with him in 10 days. Andie Anderson covers the "How To" beat for "Composure" magazine and is assigned to write an article on "How to Lose a Guy in 10 days." They meet in a bar shortly after the bet is made.
Harvard educated lawyer Lucy Kelson, following in the footsteps of her lawyer parents, uses her career for social activism. She hides any sense of femininity behind her work. George Wade is the suave public face of the Manhattan-based Wade Corporation, a development firm that Lucy routinely opposes and whose true head is George's profit-oriented brother, Howard Wade. George, who has a reputation as a lady's man, has had as his legal counsel a series of beautiful female lawyers with questionable credentials, they who have more primarily acted as his casual sex partners. Needing a real lawyer, he offers Lucy the job of his legal counsel on a chance meeting. Despite warnings from her parents in working for the "enemy", Lucy, who has no intention of being the latest in his bed partners, accepts the job as she feels she can do more good from the inside, and as George, as part of the job offer, promises not to demolish a community center in a heritage building as part of a development ... Written by
Mark Feuerstwin filmed scenes for this film, most of which ended up not making the final cut. See more »
When Lucy is crying at her friend's house and her friend sits down and wraps her arms around Lucy, Lucy's hands switch between holding onto her friend's arm and having them in her lap between shots. See more »
[on the phone]
Hi, Mr. Wong, it's Lucy Kelson. I need one No. 13, two No. 7's...
[walking back and forth]
I can't believe how small this apartment is, it's actually shocking!
I need three No. 8's, no garlic...
It's a very good thing your parents went to the movies, we'd never have squeezed in!
I need one No. 7 and...
You realize, I can actually move from one side of this apartment to the other in 6 seconds. Watch this,
...and a No. 11, please. No, actually, this is ...
See more »
At the end of the credits, a picture postcard is shown with a rendering of the Coney Island Towers project, with the community center preserved as part of the design. See more »
Great interactions between two great natural comic actors...and a usable plot
Two Weeks Notice (2002)
Hugh Grant is funny. Sandra Bullock is funny. "Two Weeks Notice" takes full advantage of both, and for a warm, if someone canned, romantic comedy, it's enjoyable.
The premise is two-fold. First is the idea that Bullock makes herself indispensable as an assistant to an unbelievably demanding boss (an precursor of the more recent "The Devil Wears Prada" though in this case Grant is also a bit incompetent). Then she has to give notice she is quitting. This makes Grant desperate, which is always fun to watch.
The other premise is the feel-good part where a community center with history needs to be saved, somehow (an echo, perhaps, of "You've Got Mail"). Bullock is a do-gooder and a smart one, and she finds working with Grant has threatened her idealism. In fact, this is the deeper part of the movie, if still treated with typical easy going slightness. I mean, this is no serious commentary for sure, any more than "My Man Godfrey" will really change our views about unemployment in the depression. But it helps to have a cause to root for.
Most of all I came to love Bullock for her natural on-screen personality. She's so likable in her own offbeat way you come to support her view of the world automatically. And in this case that's a good thing, even if you also understand how Grant's character is both a jerk and a lovable misguided rich man. Grant of course is his own kind of natural, and the two are rather good on screen. They might not have chemistry, the way you'd want the screen to steam up, but they have energy or synergy together, more like the other Grant (Cary) and some of his counterparts did in the old days.
I'm tilting this review toward a feeling that this is a screwball comedy as in the the late 30s and early 40s, and in a way it is, though not nutty enough perhaps to really qualify. It does have the standard romantic comedy problem of two leads who would be great together if only a million things weren't standing in the way.
This movie gets weak reviews overall, but I liked it, and don't hesitate to recommend it as a thin but enjoyable comedy.
7 of 9 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?