What Love Is (2007) User Reviews

A bit too loud for my taste

[bellino-angelo2014 · 5/10 · 12 April 2023]

I have been curious about WHAT LOVE IS since 2019 because it stars some fine actors I follow and I love to give every movie a chance, including this that has 5,1. But when I saw it last January I could see why it has such a score.

Tom (Cuba Gooding jr) returns home the night before Valentine's Day only to find a letter outside the door and seeing his long term girlfriend leaving him. Soon Tom decides to invite his best friends Sal (Matthew Lillard), George (Sean Astin) and Ken (Mars Callahan, also the film's director) and spend most of the first half talking about women and their experiences. In the second part some women come and after a strip show they'll make our guys think like real men, and Tom will finally learn what love it (nice reference to the title).

At the beginning I was liking it but as it progressed it became so loud that I was even torn for the score to give when it was over. I especially disliked Lillard's character because he not only was loud, but said the crassest of things and the most absurd things (I can't even report them here because they'll violate IMDB standards). And towards the end it seemed confusing that Gooding' character had to learn what love is only after he is left by another woman with which he was trying during the evening.

Overall, a confusing mix of drama and comedy that certainly needed a re-write. Recommended only to fans of the stars of for folks with very low standards.

Exhausting gab-fest

[Buddy-51 · 4/10 · 12 December 2011]

Tom (Cuba Gooding, Jr.) arrives home all eager to celebrate Valentine's Day with his girlfriend Sara. He even plans on asking Sara to marry him and has gathered four of his closest buddies to witness the occasion. Much to his dismay, however, he discovers upon entering the house that Sara has packed her bags and left him a Dear John letter, effectively putting an end to Tom's vision of eternal marital bliss. Further complicating the issue is the fact that one of Tom's friends, mistakenly believing he's going to a party, has invited a bunch of hot young ladies from his bar to join in the festivities.

You could be forgiven for assuming that "What Love Is" began life as a theatrical work, since writer/director Mars Callahan has filmed it in the form usually reserved for stage-to-screen adaptations. It all takes place on a single set, with the characters declaiming at one another in that histrionic way that stage actors alone are wont to do. The result is an inert, talky, claustrophobic work riddled with heightened dialogue, pseudo-profundities, long-winded speechifying and manic performances. Each character is given his moment in the spotlight – whereupon he proceeds to air his grievances concerning women, gays, straights and each other - then hands the microphone off to the next person, who pretty much does the same.

Then we get the distaff view of things, as the ladies who arrive for the party barricade themselves in the restroom to discuss at exhausting length the outrageousness and inadequacies of men.

Finally, it all comes down to the mixing of the sexes as the party moves into high gear and the characters engage in verbal jousting about the problems and pitfalls of romantic relationships.

The movie indulges in any number of requisite stereotypes, ranging from the loudmouthed, homophobic misogynist to the lisping, swishing homosexual (played by Callahan himself) and just about everything in between.

In the final analysis, a game cast – which includes Matthew Lillard, Sean Astin and Anne Heche, among others – is let down by inferior filmmaking and material.

I certainly didn't sense any love, just boring, mindless conversation.

[callanvass · 4/10 · 6 January 2011]

(Credit IMDb) Tom plans to surprise Sara with an engagement ring, and he's asked his four best friends to witness the popping of the question at his place on Valentine's night. Trouble is Sara's left him a "Dear John" letter and will be by soon for her suitcases; plus, thinking it's a party, Tom's friend Sal has invited five women who were at his bar to come too. First the men talk - about women, sex, love, and homophobia (Tom's pals include a happily married guy, a gay man newly engaged, a metrosexual, and Sal, an inveterate player). Then the women arrive and argue in the loo about men and sex before joining the boys for talk, alcohol, and hookups. But what of Sara, and what of love?

What point were they honestly trying to make here? All I got was a few well known actors swearing, and trying to make things out on what love truly is. Not to mention, all of the characters pretty much grated my nerves. Cuba's character is a whiny person, Mathew Lillard is rather despicable for most of it, and Andrew Daily is overbearing as the gay man. The end also infuriated me. Yeah, I get it. Move on from your mistakes, but are we really supposed to believe Cuba moved on that suddenly? It ended abruptly just like that. Love is about communication, love is pure form. And most importantly love comes from the heart. I'm not an expert but I know that much.

Performances. Cuba Gooding is a favorite of mine, as I have stated numerous times, but here is character is overbearing, stupid and overly whiny. He deserves better material, and his talents are far above this. Matthew Lillard is too cocky, and unfunny for my liking. His crude ways were difficult to get through. Sean Astin has virtually nothing to do, but stand around and offer advice. Andrew Daly is overbearing as the gay man, I wanted to slap him. Mars Callahan is basically the "Cool through it all" type. Gina Gershon and Anne Heche are wasted in their roles.

Bottom line. Mediocre is an understatement. It wasn't painful, but I certainly got annoyed far too much for my liking. Look elsewhere for a romantic film, because this certainly isn't your ticket.

4/10

More like a Play than a movie

[Dr_Sagan · 22 June 2015]

Who can say what love is? Maybe some could. This movie isn't trying to answer that. Just to see it from "a guy's perspective".

It feels more like a theatrical play than a movie. The acting is good in these terms. It has a very fast editing that surprisingly works because of the dialogs and the timing.

There are some truths in there, that's for sure, but it seems also like it serves some very old stereotypes. Also the female characters are obviously written by a clueless man and seem shallow.

Overall: Saw it in 2015. I know it didn't go well in terms of box -office, but if you can catch it on TV or on line, watch it. preferably with a female partner with.

Good Ideas, Not So Good Storyline

[Def_Man · 2/10 · 9 February 2007]

I was given the chance to preview this movie a couple months ago. I thought "Oh, it's Cuba Gooding Jr., it's going to be decent." So, I went in with hope it could be a possibly good movie. Well, I will be honest, the first twenty minutes were captivatingly interesting, but as time progressed, I was wondering why they didn't move onto another location, why it was all at one location. I thought the dialogue was good, but the lack of change in location made the story suffer. If it had more of a storyline, this probably would be a classic. The ideas were good, but with lack of change and relying heavily on dialogue tends to make it suffer.

Truly Bad in an Interesting Way

[ChicagoGirl16 · 3/10 · 1 April 2007]

This movie fails, but it fails in an interesting way.

First of all, it's not a film. It's an unsuccessful attempt to permanently record a stage play, masquerading as a film. The director seems to have no clue to the techniques, nuances and flexibility possible with film.

Instead, 90% of the "action" takes place on two very contrived stage sets. The characters are merely stereotypes. The "action" consists of each character delivering a long soliloquy on their philosophy regarding sex. However, the writer is so self-absorbed that every point of view is that of a young male "player." Ultimately, this is a few hours of audible naval-gazing. Instead of presenting different points of view, this feels like an inner dialogue from one really immature, boring guy.

The female characters are especially shallow and unbelievable when they talk about sex, which is all anyone does in the movie. They are clearly women speaking words written by a clueless man who is developmentally about 25 years old.

The director also doesn't trust his actors to convey complex emotions on film. That's unfortunate, because there are some fine actors in the film, who are capable of much more. Instead, the performance are so "big," the gestures so exaggerated, that they seem a parody of stage acting. Only Sean Astin's nice-guy character manages to escape this curse, appearing understated by comparison.

Whenever the script calls for strong emotion on screen, the director goes into a series of cartoonishly distorted quick cuts. Again, this indicates a lack of trust in the actors, or respect for their abilities.

If any of these tactics worked, they would be interesting artistic choices. Unfortunately, they don't, and there's nothing interesting about this movie.

Not a Rom-Com

[blrnani · 7/10 · 2 March 2018]

This is theatre. And it lives up pretty well to the title. The writer-director gathers a broad range of 10 typical gender stereotypes and then uses them to voice different views on love and relationships, with no holding back on opinions. And during the process one learns how love underpins so much in life. for example, the guys have been friends since high school, so they have both the freedom to say what they really think and the respect not to let it spoil their friendship. And the simple revelation at the end sums it all up - though I think the Cuba Gooding character went overboard in his interpretation of it. When his girl, clearly reluctant to terminate the relationship and hoping there was still a foundation there, said "let's sit down and talk about it", the answer should've been "yes, let's do that" not "no - you go away and think about what you really want". That doesn't negate the idea that giving your loved one freedom, if the love is strong enough they will come back to you. But any relationship is built on the combination of the two parties, not the decisions of one of them. The story is hung on that relationship, which highlights the sadness of life's crossed wires. They've been in the relationship for 3 years and she seems to have reached the point where his reluctance to make the final commitment suggests they don't have a future together. Little does she know that: 1) he has always been committed exclusively to her, despite steering away from formal marriage; and 2) he has decided he wants to take that final step, has bought the ring, and invited his friends round to share the moment of his Valentine's Day proposal - although his misogynistic friend thought it was just a party, so he invited the pretty girls to join them. Their 'arrival' scene was out of place, however, and should've been cut, as it basically only represented his view of women and detracted from the balanced dialogue of the rest of the film. I am sorry this film did so badly at the box office, as it offers so much more than the usual movie fare. I think it would make a worthy project to take to the theatre, which is ideally suited to this format.

Words Can't Convey

[pak-hanafi · 1/10 · 22 March 2007]

Just how atrocious this film is. If I can prevent one person from seeing this movie, my life shall not have been lived in vain.

Can you say shill? There can be no other explanation for some of the remarks here, promoting this film.

The incessant barrage of graphic sexual descriptions instantly reaches the level of high school titillation and exploitation. The film will be popular with those physically old enough to get in, but with an intellectual age of 13-17.

There are a few moments with some clever dialog; you'll notice them right away since they are so rare. Oh.. Hallelujah! its only about 90 minutes long.

This film is so formulaic, it should be included as a classic example of "How Obvious Can a Film Be, To Be Created to Appeal To The Lowest Common Denomenator of Filmgoers?" Unfortunately that would send people to see it, which it simply doesn't deserve.

*Watch the parade of guy actors rant about their character's pet peeve. *Prepare to suppress your gag reflex as every oral sex joke and gay stereotype is stuffed down your throat. *View with disbelief as the women are introduced and you question whether you walked into the wrong theater and somehow are watching the wrong film. *Suddenly realize that yes, they're going to subject you to the same behavior and style with all the women character's raving monologues.

There are a couple of moments of actual acting when the actors realize that they might have some fun with the portrayal of their smaller than life character.

Avoid this film at all costs.

So funny, So real

[ladyangela83 · 9/10 · 10 October 2006]

This is the movie to see if you want an idea of what love is from a guy's perspective!!! It was so funny, I highly recommend it to everyone. Awesome cast!!! Everyone was so cute. What love is, what love is, WHAT LOVE IS!!! YEAH!!! It's nice to see Cuba in this adorable role. My brother totally agrees with me that this is how guys think. It's so cute though to see that guys stress about this stuff too. The dialog was very well written. It's almost like the writer recorded the real conversations. I guess that's what love is. I'd love to see it again. The music was really good, too. I'm buying the soundtrack as soon as it comes out.

Bring a blue bag

[melynes · 1/10 · 24 March 2007]

Keep your money. "What love is" appears to have been regurgitated by an unsuspecting toilet. That said, if you enjoy spittle punctuated rapid fire dialogue spawned by pubescent boys in high school locker rooms, this movie is for you. Credits do go to Mars however for stretching his imagination and gifting the viewers with verbiage so politically incorrect one wonders if it is truly imagination at work or do these thoughts literally reside permanently with Mars. If men are from Mars then where is Mars from? Yes I was at the premier in LA. Yes there was laughter. Yes there were 599 minds in the same gutter.

This movie may very well end up being a cult classic.

My condolences to a cast worthy of much better.

A great movie to see how guys think

[westsideninja · 9/10 · 28 March 2008]

I feel compelled to warn users "Dont listen to critics" I am an average person male and I watch a lot of movies. I am not a professional and often times think they lose the point of enjoying a film due to the fact they are always looking for whats wrong with it. I had the opportunity to view this film and thought it was a fresh take on the situations that arise from the dilemmas of love. I thought the dialogue was very honest and sincere. At times a bit over the top but none the less accurate. I have been in all these situations personally and know that a lot of men have too. These days the illusion of love is portrayed in the movies as being fairytale like and in reality it is far from it. The perspective given is of friends with different personalities all looking for love. The characters do a fine job of spanning all lifestyles and situations. The conversations are truthful and honest. I highly recommend this movie if you are trying to understand male thinking in relationships. So give it a try and see what it does for you before you accept the word of a critic

worst movie I have seen in 20 years-

[mdab212 · 1/10 · 24 March 2007]

Like one of the other critics, I feel compelled to warn the public to not waste their money or time seeing this two hour gibberish of self-indulgent, trite diatribe that takes place in one room of a house for 99% of the film. While the trailers and great cast lead you to believe this movie is something worth seeing, it is so far from worth seeing. I am almost enraged that it is out there for the public to see, something that should rise to some standard of quality - yet, completely fails to do so. I was stunned at how bad it was. I guess it just takes rich friends to get something on the big screen. I was also stunned to see how the writer/director/actor is so self-aggrandizing as to exaggerate his bio on the www.bigskymotionpictures.com website, stating that he was "cast opposite Brad Pitt" in Kalifornia, and was "featured with William Hurt" in the Accidental Tourist. Then look up the films on IMDb and see if you can find him short of 50 credits down the pike.

An entertaining refreshing new comedy!

[Seanhill13 · 9 March 2007]

What Love Is spins a great twist on the romantic comedy and turns the usual genre upside down on its head. Directed by Mars Callahan, this film has a great ensemble cast with stars, such as: Cuba Gooding Jr., Mathew Lillard, Sean Astin, Anne Heche, Andrew Daly, Gina Gershon, Tamala Jones, Jud Taylor, Shiri Appleby, Victoria Pratt and Terrance 'T.C.' Carson. The scenes in this film were great. It is a frank, unapologetic film that explains at its very core what Love truly means. Mathew Lillard was amazing as Sal, especially in the scene about monogamy, Sean Astin's character's diatribe about women is great, Andrew Daly's scenes with Mathew Lillard and Anne Heche are hilarious! It's a great Valentines Day movie for guys. I don't know how many times I remember having similar conversations with my friends about women just like these characters do in this film. The writing seems almost as if it were recorded. What Love Is is a laugh out loud, realistic riot that will keep you entertained and satisfied that you went to see what could be the best comedy of the year.

couldn't sit through this at all

[FFAxDAVID · 3/10 · 16 March 2008]

i started to watch this expecting it to be mildly amusing but overall watchable, and ended up not being able to force self to watch to its end.

within 5 minutes it grated on my nerves from a non stop barrage of unrealistic dialogue between supposed friends which just didn't let up,and far from being a witty and interesting take on male/female perspectives it just seemed trite and annoying with 'maybe' the occasional observation that would have been funny if i wasn't already so far gone as to not care.

if it wasn't so full-on in your face trying to force the characters views on you it may have worked,but am sad to say it is full on and doesn't work at all in my opinion,only giving it a 3 rating and thats because there's a small possibility it improved after i gave up watching it( which i doubt).

Too much talk

[casablancavic · 5/10 · 17 November 2020]

Great actors in a script with far too much talk.

This was probably written to be a stage play, that's the entire feel of it.

Way too much chatter, non=stop.

All good actors but of course, Cuba and Gina shine.

Also way too much swearing and sex talk...far more than needed.

Gina and Cuba are just amazing.

Bad movies should stay bad and stop pretending to be good.

[tendayi_NT · 1/10 · 10 June 2010]

I feel with the experience and knowledge I have acquired about good movies that it is my responsibility to steer people away from disgraceful attempts at entertainment. I have watched a number of bad movies, but none have profoundly irritated me as much as What Love Is.

First off, the dialogue. It is totally unrealistic. The director wishes to portray these characters as being very smart and witty, but instead it transpires as a poor stage performance on fast forward disguised as a film. And its not that they are too fast to keep up with. They are fast like the blur of a trashy sports car at top speed before it crashes into a restaurant and kills everyone inside. It's a bloody mess.

Next off, the characters. They are unlikeable. I don't like them. You won't either. They are very stereotypical, and the fact that they are so consciously aware of their persona does not add to their charm, but just makes the whole performance tiresome. They say and portray nothing interesting and in the rare instances that they do say something, it is totally devoid of normal human portrayal and response that it does not even register, unless you keep pausing the film to think about the truth between the banalities. I can't believe Matthew Lillard, I was very satisfied with his performance in Wicker Park, could not believe it was the same person.

Every one of these guys is overacting. I expect this from Cuba Gooden Jr, because he can't act, but not from the rest. They all act like Ace Ventura without the humour. I hate these guys guts so bad that if a nuclear bomb had gone off in the middle of the room after the first thirty minutes, I would have requested that this film get an Oscar. What angers me the most is that the film pretends to be so smart, but the "point" that is trying to be expressed has been done a million times before and a million times better, often with powerful subtlety that keeps the stuff in you head. It tries to be revealing, but just ends up looking dumb.

There is a scene with a bunch of women, which tries to be as "smart" as the guy scene, but is unbelievably worse.

I had become slightly worried over the years that I was becoming so desensitised by foul language in the media that it perhaps had no effect on me any more. But this film proved that theory wrong. There is too much swearing in this movie. I find it unjustified and offensive.

This film is also racist. I'd like to think unconsciously so, with the good guy being black to try and balance the equation. I don't get how the result can be this blatant in modern cinematography, however.

I have to give this film a one. There is no other choice. If it wasn't trying so hard and insulting my intelligence, I would gladly give it a four. If the film actually made me smile more than once, I wouldn't have to subtract a point for boredom. If it wasn't so racist, I wouldn't have had to subtract an additional point. This is the worst film I have seen, and I can't even laugh at how bad it is.

Stageplay-style comedy

[Mr Nuff · 8/10 · 6 July 2009]

I don't believe that What Love Is was a play before it was shot as a movie, yet I found it reminiscent of some stage play-turned-films I've seen. The main reasons are that it takes place primarily in one room, the dialog is very fast-paced, and emotions are high from the first moment and rarely drops.

In this sense, it's not terribly original. What's more is that the small plot line is pretty predictable. However, where this movie shines is in it's advice and the characters' heartfelt monologues. Perhaps it my male bias, but the men's part far outshone and impressed me than the women's scene. Each of the characters reminded me of one of my friends and although it's unlikely these friends would say the things they did, it's something that they would actually believe. For example, Matthew Lilliard's homophobic rant is probably not something he'd say aloud, but you know he would think it. And the other characters react pretty well, continuing the dialog until they each have their turn to chime in with their thoughts on love, sex and women.

The second and third acts aren't as good as the first, but there were a few gems that really got me, especially the gay man's sex advice (it's 99.9% correct) and Judy Tylor's (the dumb girl) thoughts on what love really is.

So the characters were interesting, the dialog was funny, but mostly it was the gems of wisdom of the characters that really made me think, made me laugh and made me cheer.

F this F that.....

[Greatornot · 2/10 · 25 April 2009]

....Basically that is the whole movie. People just using obscenities one after another , string after string. Cuba Gooding is a fine actor and it is beneath him to have taken this awful role. The movie is an insult to my intelligence. It is an insult to men. It is an insult to women . It is an insult to every race , creed and color. Just an absolutely horrible movie. This was done in an intimate style , much like the film version of David Mamet plays. Still this was far from an artsy type of film. It just reeked of male bravado on speed versus female bravado on speed. The sad thing is, the movie could have succeeded , if it were done in an intelligent manner. The material was original and witty. The dialog was just beyond trashy and seemed to want to shock more than anything else. Just a very juvenile, teenage type of humor movie. I guess that was the audience they were targeting. Oh well. Wish I can have my hour and half back.

You should see this movie for the following reasons :

[csid · 10/10 · 25 March 2008]

Two good reasons :

1) You will find out(if you don't already know) all the things that are wrong with relationships these days. Why everyone is playing on defense, and why (as a good friend told me) if two people are in love, they f*** (each other up)

2) It's a chance to learn a lot of vital information about relations from a man's points of view and a then a woman's. This could help you from not having to go through all the torments of an ended relation (from a reason that you do not understand) and learning all this on your own.

I can not understand why the movie has such a low rating. Maybe because people would have expected more action or i don't know. But this movie is more like 'food for the brain'. It can really make you wonder what you want in life, what you already have and what you might be searching for. It sound easy, but after this movie, i saw that all the years spent on relationships that ended badly, one night stands, and being the person that always has to hear what a jerk he is, but how their love will conquer all, all that experience can be summed up in about 90 minutes (even less, because i didn't know for sure what the women thought about all this). So .. in conclusion, if you seem interested about the subject you should see it. (and please ignore some of the bad acting and sometimes the cliché dialog because it's worthwhile )

By the way .. this is my first official review, and the idea of the movie made me so determined to write it. Also if you like this sort of movies where more ideas flight around than bullets, check out The Man from Earth (2007).

No redeeming value

[vincentlynch-moonoi · 1/10 · 11 June 2015]

Cuba Gooding has demonstrated more than once that he is a very good dramatic actor who can also do comedy scripts. So what happened to his career? Answer: films like this.

This is the kind of film where you sit there asking yourself how didn't someone notice how badly this was going and either drastically change the script or pull the plug.

Problem 1: It's just plain vulgar. There's a growing mood in this country toward political correctness, and this film totally ignores that.

Problem 2: It's a play on screen with limited sets. Translation: Made on the cheap. And what was the result? A whopping $19,000 at the box office. Can we say nuclear bomb??? Problem 3: Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk. Please, just shut up.

Let's see. What can I say good about this film? Nothing. I'm serious. This is one of the worst films I ever watched.

Look at it as a play and it's great

[amoscato · 10/10 · 3 June 2008]

This so well written that everyone is down on it because most movies are written by a whole group of non-writers. I think Callahan's big mistake is wrting this for the screen, where it can't be appreciated. He should be writing for the stage, this screenplay is as good as anything Mamet, McNally or Lanford Wilson writes. As a film it is static with it's one set, but it is great theater. I would love to see this performed on a stage where it would be appreciated.

As for the actors, all gave a believable performance, except the gay character which was more caricature than real person. And that pole dance fantasy which just didn't fit the rest of the film.

What Love Is is a play on screen

[infosponge7 · 10/10 · 12 January 2011]

I bought this from a bargain bin thinking it would be a light-weight romantic comedy, but oh-my-God, I did not expect what this really was. It was like watching a stage play... by David Mamet or William Inge. The dialog and timing is absolutely impeccable! And the subject matter so real and realistic - no, check that - so much BETTER than real life (we all wish we could be so clever in real life) presented in a realistic manner. Man, I love character pieces like this, but this moves so much faster than most character studies; there is no time to let your mind wander, let alone get bored (think "Noises Off" or "Send me a Tenor"). And the acting is incredible! Spot on. Tight group, able to play off each other extremely well, but I have to say Matthew Lillard is absolutely brilliant!! And Mars Callahan does it all - writing, directing, acting - with such grace it appears effortless. You HAVE to see this movie. F***in' unbelievable!!

Quick witted and extremely funny

[davis_pd · 8/10 · 20 March 2008]

OK this is my first review and I have seen tons of movies. I found this movie to be so much more than I expected and a breath of fresh air from the usual movies I see. Maybe we could get more directors to do things that are creative and take a chance. because I am in introspect now is why I comment on this movie. It was a blast. A movie filmed like a theatrical play. Great stuff. The actors and the acting witty. I am a guy and I think this is how we men bond period when we hurt as well as when we celebrate. The women talk just like some of my girlfriends and all in all they are just like us guys. I would assume we all have friends in these characters. Its a fun ride to watch. See it.......!!!!!!!!!.

Investors be PROUD!

[tori_marino · 8/10 · 15 November 2006]

I saw this film at the screening and Big Sky, the investors, and all involved should be very proud of this film! It is well done and funny, pretty naughty, but funny! A must see this Valentines! Matt Lillard is AWESOME! The way he maintains his character through-out the film is great. I think I've met this guy at every bar I've ever been in at closing time! The contrast between the men and women is hilarious! This is "Sex in the City" with the men voicing their view! All of the cast is first rate and they do an excellent job. The scene with Andrew Daly and Anne Heche is VERY funny! I loved Jud Tylor in this....Gina Gershon....what can you say...always very HOT!!!!!!

Talking About What Love Is

[kashraz · 10/10 · 16 March 2007]

When I entered the the screening for this movie I expected nothing more than a love comedy aimed at couples probably too busy having fun to watch the movie. When I came out I felt as though I'd sat through an awesome stage performance where dialog is the driving force, the action.

Now perhaps some may snicker at the thought of watching a stage play on film when you could just watch it on a stage. But this I say is where the beauty and advantages of using the film medium come in. Closeups and careful editing are used in this film to help create action within the conversations occurring of the movie.

In What Love Is the camera isn't used to scream that "LOOK, here's Cuba Gooding Jr.... and LOOK here's Gina Gershon." Instead it's used to emphasize the key to this movie, the well-written dialog.

I do realize that I'm probably sounding like a broken record with the dialog this is what keeps it real and easy to relate to. Just think, how much of the communication in your daily life consists of the spoken word.

And again this is probably another aspect of the movie that may be frowned upon. But how often do we get to hear and see the actual thoughts of the opposite sex. The characters in this movie are the characters of our thoughts, and some of them are the voices we try to suppress, and the voices we never hear but only imagine.

I just realized that I forgot to add the bit about the movie being funny, but not in the slapstick sense. You've gotta listen and be attentive to get it. Listening is the key to understanding this movie and perhaps to understanding what love really is.

Couldn't all love use a little more communication, listening and attention?