Charlie Day and Jenny Slate try to win back their exes in the rote rom-com I Want You Back
There’s no spark of life in this by-the-numbers date movie
Film Reviews I Want You Back
Cultural critic Umberto Eco once wrote, “Two clichés make us laugh. A hundred clichés move us. For we sense dimly that the clichés are talking among themselves, and celebrating a reunion.” He was referring to Casablanca and how its use of myriad archetypes transcended the film’s aesthetic limitations and improvised production. It’s tempting to extend Eco’s argument to other hyper-formulaic entertainment, the kind that proudly embrace genre tropes, but it turns out that not all clichés are created equal. Take I Want You Back, a trite romantic comedy that hits all the expected notes at just the wrong pitch, creating a dull and lifeless symphony.
Part of the problem lies in the unrealized farcical potential of the film’s high-concept premise. Peter (Charlie Day) and Emma (Jenny Slate) both get dumped by their respective partners on the same day. Devastated by their sudden singlehood, the two meet-ugly-cry in the stairwell of their shared office building and quickly hatch a scheme to break up their exes’ new relationships. This means, practically speaking, that there are six different characters in a self-generated mess, which allows for the possibility of absurd misunderstandings and screwball shenanigans. None of that happens in I Want You Back. In fact, all six characters only share the screen for the climactic ruse reveal, which lands as flatly as possible despite occurring at a riverboat wedding, a location seemingly rife for mishaps.
Love, Simon screenwriters Isaac Aptaker and Elizabeth Berger instead isolate Peter and Emma with the other’s ex for the majority of the film. (It’s unclear if this was due to COVID restrictions, cast scheduling, or just a lack of imagination.) Emma contrives a truly unbelievable reason to volunteer at the middle school where Anne (Gina Rodriguez), Peter’s ex, teaches; she’s there to “help” Anne’s pretentious new drama teacher beau, Logan (Manny Jacinto), with his production of Little Shop Of Horrors. These scenes are mostly tedious and predictable, culminating in Emma effectively catching Logan’s eye and inciting jealousy in Anne. They do, however, provide Slate the opportunity to perform a heartfelt, mildly energizing rendition of “Suddenly, Seymour.”
Meanwhile, Peter signs up to be a client of Emma’s physical-trainer ex Noah (Scott Eastwood) and speedily befriends him during their workout sessions. Though Peter tries to remind him of his feelings for Emma, it turns out that Noah isn’t on the rebound but rather genuinely in love with his new pie-making girlfriend, Ginny (Clark Backo). (The range of professions in I Want You Back are particularly yuppiefied, even for a romantic comedy.) In the film’s most straightforwardly comedic sequence, Peter realizes Noah’s sincere feelings after an evening at a nightclub turns disastrous. Hot tubs, MDMA, and a Pete Davidson cameo are involved.
With its subplots and various ploys to separate its cast, I Want You Back plays like a two-hour sitcom episode—an awkward narrative structure that might go down smoother if the situations were more amusing or the jokes funnier. Aptaker and Berger adopt a frustratingly grounded, realistic approach to the story, promising hijinks and then tackling the contrivances with all the levelheaded practicality of a stringent middle manager.
The main pairing might be the film’s biggest liability, though. Slate and Day have demonstrated over the past decade-plus that they possess unique individual comic voices. (Day, especially, has crafted a hall-of-fame sitcom character in Charlie on It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia.) Unfortunately, the two have little romantic chemistry together, which admittedly doesn’t really matter that much since they spend much of the movie apart. They convince as buddies who get drunk at karaoke together, but when it comes time for them to suddenly realize their feelings for each other almost an hour behind the audience, they can’t quite sell the newfound ardor.
The one “twist” to standard rom-com formula is that the film has no villains. Every character’s reason for splitting up or reconciling or proposing marriage is understandable. Neither Anne nor Noah are characterized as jerks for dumping our beloved protagonists; they just want different things. And their new partners are decent if bland people, too, with only Jacinto ever threatening to come across as truly obnoxious, thanks to his pompousness and sexual presumptuousness. Moreover, Peter and Emma’s romantic scheme mostly helps them realize their own professional ambitions. For Peter, that means leaving his job at a profit-hungry elder care company to open an independent, compassionate retirement home. For Emma, it’s becoming a guidance counselor, spurred by a brief bond with a troubled tween. The only real bad guys here are personal insecurity and lack of motivation.
This focus on internal struggle wouldn’t be the worst idea in the world if all the stuff around it didn’t feel so rote. Everything from Peter and Emma’s inane backstories to their sweaty attempts to win back partners who were clearly not right for them in the first place mark this as a case of a creative team going through the motions. The ending hinges on a callback so obvious and manufactured that it provokes eye rolls, even as it slightly subverts expectations. In I Want You Back, the clichés are still talking among themselves. Only this time, they’re slowly turning on each other.
50 Comments
Modern romantic comedies are a genre in crisis & this seems like a prime example, with movies desperately lacking relatable or sensible premises and believable or likable characters
Definitely a Prime example
I think there’s a distinction to be made between movies that have romance and comedy and Romantic Comedies. We need more of the former and less of the latter.
Agree, though ‘Palm Springs’ and ‘Plus One’ are a couple of standout good ones from the last year or so.
“Plus One” was not, in fact, any good and was just as trite and predictable as these things tend to come.
Romantic comedies are almost always trite and predictable, but at least Plus One was funny.
Yeah, it’s that kind of thinking that results in crappy rom-coms. Good ones actually exist! Stop settling for crap. Plus One was not actually funny, either.
It was funny to me, Laurence!
I’m glad you liked it. I like rom-coms, too. So if you enjoyed it, hooray.
I enjoyed it, and thus have an opinion on that film that is different from yours.
Well, then! I, uh, will continue to hold a contrary opinion and do nothing else about it!
Carry on, carry on.
Also the Wrong Missy was outstanding in that category.
We liked Palm Springs a lot, haven’t watched Plus One. We did watch Destination Wedding recently and while most people seemed to have hated it, it was right up our alley: two hyperverbal nerds trying to work through emotional issues logically is basically me and my wife in a nutshell. Plus I appreciated the formal decision to have literally every line of dialogue delivered by the two leads; no one else in the movie says a single word. We also liked Ibiza: Love Drunk, which was pretty low-key but had a wonderful warmth and tone. (Plus: Michaela Watkins being psychotic)
i’ll throw happiest season in there, too. that was a cute one. also season two of love life was one of the best romantic comedies i’ve seen in years, and it’s a whole ass tv season!
I dunno, it seems like they’ve been on an upswing in the last decade thanks in part to streaming platforms, which they’re well suited for. Netflix’s “Set It Up” was quite enjoyable, and their “To All The Boys I’ve Loved Before” seems to have been a genuinely big hit that was perfectly palatable.
The Half of It was great.
Every genre looks like it’s in decline to people who don’t watch them, I suppose.
I think that Rom-Com’s were hit and miss before streaming, but streaming services have sort of leveled the playing field as to what to watch. So films like The Princess Switch 3 are getting as much media attention as ones like this.
Seems like the last truly great rom-com I saw was the 2015 Jason Sudeikis/Alison Brie vehicle Sleeping with Other People. So that’s, what…a seven-year fallow period?
Palm Springs was a more recent one that I really love
Sounds like a typical rom com to me except for the exes not being horrible people?
At forty-six, Charlie Day, while looking very well-preserved, is definitely a little long in the tooth to play the lead in trite, predictable rom-coms like this one.
Turns out that TODAY is his 46th birthday! Happy birthday to Charlie Day!
Well, he was 45 when they filmed it, so I guess he gets a pass.
the always sunny guys need to start aging and getting yellower veneers because they’re getting stuck in the uncanny valley.
The funny thing is, he doesn’t really look much different from way back in the day when he showed up on Law and Order. Even without the beard.
Edit
Cool
It sounds like they wanted to do My Best Friend’s Wedding but do it wrong by adding a love story. Trying to break-up people in love for your own selfish goals is objectively wrong and they shouldn’t end happily. It’s fine for the movie to end the movie with them in a place of hope but them realizing their love for each other and positive career shift sort makes it seem what they did was okay.
Yeah, My Best Friend’s Wedding is somehow culturally remembered as a movie that celebrated the lead character being a psycho, when it actually thoroughly chastises her for it.
Is Charlie Day wearing Mickey Mouse gloves in that last photo? Get some tan in those hands!Also, try saying “brief bond with a troubled tween” ten times fast.
I wish they would make a romantic comedy called Klinger’s Wedding to Radar.
Wow. Good one. How high did you get to come up with that one?
It’s not such a stretch. It all comes from a television program called M*A*S*H.
Yeah I’m 54. I know Mash, Radar, and Klinger. I was just commenting on how inspired it sounded.
Ah, then thanks! I may have been high when I came up with it, but more likely not. And I think there was a rumor for a while, maybe a decade ago, that Klinger and Radar (or Jamie Farr and Gary Burghoff, that is) had really gotten married, so maybe I can’t claim it’s my idea in any case.
He was eating rotisserie chicken.
Sounds like a heterosexual nightmare.
a good rule of thumb is if scott eastwood is in your movie it sucks.
It’s a remake of this
Forget your ex Charlie. I’ll take good care of you. We can cuddle like you do Frank on always sunny. Stinky socks and all. Lol.
I haven’t run the numbers, but I’d bet good money romantic comedies are criticized for contrived plots at a rate several times that of other genres. Action movies have contrived plots too, but I rarely hear people criticize them. In fact, I rarely hear actual fans of any genre complain about contrived plots. People don’t really care if the set up for a movie is ridiculous. They want the action.
The inability to let go of an ex is an idea with a lot of comic potential. Especially with the leads trying to break up new couples. There is a lot of room for either pathos or farce, but it does seem like this reviews is criticizing the movie for not doing something it’s not trying to do. It’s not a farce. Maybe it would be better as a farce, but it’s strange to criticize the lack of farcical misunderstandings.
I just want Gina Rodriguez to be in a good movie, okay?
Kajillionaire was only ok, but she was great in it!
Didn’t they already make this movie in 1997 with Meg Ryan and Matthew Broderick? Or has everybody else managed to forget Addicted to Love except for me?
I’ve never seen it, but I just watched the trailer, and you’re right, it does look like the same idea, but it also looks like a funnier movie than this one. Of course, it’s easier to make a good trailer than a good film, so I could be wrong.
Not that I’m really into Rom-Coms or anything but I thought this was decent, probably because I’m a fan of the two leads.