Funny About Love

This is the film Wilder made right after the death of his beloved soulmate, Gilda Radner. I suppose he felt that getting back to work might ease the pain. A big mistake, but forgivable under the circumstances. He IS very talented, so be sure to see some of his other work, such as "Young Frankenstein," "Frisco Kid," "Blazing Saddles," and "Silver Streak."

Friend Leonard Nimoy directed Gene Wilder in his 1990 film, Funny About Love. Also starring Christine Lahti and Mary Stuart Masterson, this romantic comedy showed the struggle of the human need to reproduce and the struggles that come with infertility. Funny About Love is nothing spectacular but goes the distance in describing a difficulty felt by 1 in every 8 couples with some humor. Human life is full of decisions, just as it is changing our minds about those decisions, Funny About Love shows this inextricable part of human life through one New York City couple.

Duffy Bergman (Gene Wilder) is on top of the world in his field as a renowned political cartoonist. One night at a book signing he is hosting, he tastes some horrible cappuccino and since "coffee is very important to him" he decides he must meet the person responsible for the dreadful cup. When he is taken to her, he is instantly smitten with her beauty and attempts to get Meg (Christine Lahti) to agree to a date with him. Although initially reluctant, Meg is eventually won over by Duffy's lighthearted comedic disposition and agrees. The two eventually marry and decide, in spite of Duffy's reservations to have a child together. After three years of infertility treatment, Meg is dejected and sick of failure and wishes to stop trying to conceive. Never really getting over his uncertainties, Duffy was thrilled with Meg's decision. As Meg's culinary career kicks into overdrive during the respite from attempting to have a child, Duffy begins to actually want to have a baby. This time, it is Meg that is unsure and wants to wait to have a baby. The constant battle of when and if to have a baby proves to be too much for their marriage and the two separate. In their time apart, they both realize what they really want; but can they get what it is they want with each other?

Gene Wilder plays the quirky jokester of a cartoonist well, and Christine Lahti plays his lighthearted wife well. The two share a beautiful on-screen chemistry making the otherwise forgettable film more fun to watch. There's nothing really to take away from this story unless you are a fan of one of the principles. The writing struggles through the entire film, being very abrupt in all the right places. I can't understand how Gene Wilder was in this film. The incredibly personal story line of the intense struggle of infertility and in- vitro fertilization after losing his wife the year prior to cancer after experiencing years of infertility. That is the aspect I take most from this film. I gain more respect for Wilder as an actor for being able to endure such a plot that so closely resembles his own life.

Gene Wilder struggles manfully to keep this limp, occasionally lame comedy afloat, but he's quickly defeated by unsure Leonard Nimoy direction, shabby editing and writing. A professional cartoonist falls for an attractive female chef (she can't be much of a chef since his first impression of her food is disgust); after meeting cute, they decide to marry, but frustration soon arrives over their failure to conceive a child. Christine Lahti has a warm, ticklish presence, but her character here is so underwritten we're not sure how we're supposed to feel about her; Mary Stuart Masterson is much better as a fraternity sex-bunny, but she belongs in a different movie (with a different partner) altogether. Based on a magazine article by Bob Greene, the picture is full of comic ideas that don't play and dramatic interludes which wilt without the proper handling. *1/2 from ****

Such a sweet, funny guy.

Just picked this DVD up the other day . . . Never heard of this movie before . . .

I thought it had just a few good, howbeit short moments - sadly, overall it was impotent & barren -

And rather ironically, this illogical movie was directed by an actor-guy whose beloved character's whole role was to be known for his extreme logic . . .?

Shows ya what a good actor he was . . .

I'm trying to console myself logically that I only paid 2 bux for this at Dollar General . . .even tho I know, very often those discs in cardboard sleeves are duds - I suppose it was worth that $2 to see Wilder . . . But sad that one of his movies was destined for a DG cardboard sleeve . . .

Note: this movie MIGHT be worth seein' one time only - hard to say who will pay $2 AND willingly sit thru - betting, assuming, hoping it will get better . . .

But the low reviews I read are not wrong. So it's def not a keeper.

I've noticed a lowest common denominator here in past reviews. People watched this with the automatic assumption that this was going to be a full-blown, slapstick 'Comedy.' Nothing could be further from the truth, as this isn't the story being told.

Had this been made today, it would be considered a 'Dramedy.' It's not story-driven enough to be a full-fledged drama, and it's not sophomoric enough to be a comedy. It lies somewhere in between, and that's not entirely a bad thing. The collapse of Duffy's marriage to Meg is realistic enough. They cannot conceive a child, which Duffy clearly feels he needs at this point in his life. He keeps pushing this with Meg, and what do you think happens? Of course she's going to feel pressure, especially when she's just been handed her dream job. We never really see 'all' of the events leading to their divorce, but this was clearly an event in the making.

What follows is what any person would do following the demise of a long-term marriage/relationship. You go out and try and find someone else in order to start again, if anything to prove that the original break-up wasn't entirely your fault. But regrettably, as Duffy finds out, this doesn't always work either. He tries for someone younger (Masterson), but it becomes frighteningly apparent that perhaps it wasn't Meg or Daphne with the conception issues, but Duffy himself.

On a side-note, Duffy's a bit of a hypocrite when it comes to relationships, as he lambastes his own father who decides not long after his wife's death, to get married again. Duffy has no problem moving on from Meg, but has distinct thoughts of how his father's life should progress. I do find a particular scene at his mother's funeral to be incredibly touching. A child runs past Duffy, crying. He picks up the child to reassure him/her that everything is going to be all right, and despite his earlier braggadocio with his father, he completely breaks down at his culminated losses. (Namely the loss of his mother and the acceptance of the fact that he and Meg will never have a child.) Is this one of the classics of all time? No. The ending, as referenced elsewhere, is extremely rushed and a little too clinically 'nice' for me. Should scenes have been deleted? Yes. Namely the ice diaper and Duffy donating sperm scene. This two different films squished together, by Leonard Nimoy. Neither of which would've probably been good on their own merits, but together, they try their best to tell a story about flawed individuals. It's about a four out of ten.

It's not as bad as other people have made it out to be.