One modern movie trope I’m still getting used to is the “doomed romance.” This is the category where the romance is destined to fail, but the movie didn’t have anything else to do, so kinda just went with it. This is very important message for some, I imagine. After all, some relationships are failures. But I’m trying to figure out why one needs to see that.
Wake me when you get an answer,
Charlie (Nick Robinson) and Harper (Emilia Jones) are doomed as a couple. We can see this from their first car trip. Charlie puts on a Civil War podcast and makes Emilia listen for four hours. When she finally objects and the two agree to listen to her mix tape, Charlie makes fun of it before they even get to the first chorus.
They should have broken up right there. I mean, yes, this is recoverable, but in the larger scheme of things, Charlie is being such a dick in the moment that he needs to bring a great deal to the table to compensate for this particular piece of dickery. Oh, “Charlie Harper?” Two names. “Charlie” and “Harper.” Not one guy named “Charlie Harper.” Is this clever? Because I just don’t see it.
I see we are using the old-fashioned stage definition of “comedy” here where nobody laughs, but maybe the tale ends well. Then again, maybe it doesn’t. A lot of Charlie Harper plays like a tragedy.
In fact, I see almost nothing in this film that resembles clever. Two young people have the hots for one another, they have sex, they share an apartment. Then they start fighting and they don’t stop until they break up. Hell of a movie, guys.
Harper is a better person than Charlie. Perhaps we should get used to that as, following Tony, Emilia Jones is going to get a lot more work in the romance department. I have no doubt that Charlie Harper was released nationally as a direct result of the success of Tony. Harper, like Tony, is an aspiring chef. The night before her first job, she sleeps in past noon (?!) and arrives late. I know it doesn’t work for the film, but I really wish she had been fired on the spot. You showed up an hour late on your first day?! I’m sorry, but what message are we supposed to take from leniency here?
Let me reiterate that Harper is the FAR superior of the two. Ambitionless and directionless, Charlie is a classic underachiever. The film makes a point of him being a well-read slacker, but he’d get his ass kicked by Ethan Hawke in Reality Bites as well-read slackers go. Road trip? Charlie doesn’t have ID to fly. Never got around to it. He drinks too much. He does drugs. He can’t really hold down serious employment. All of these are obstacles that can be overcome, but it starts with Charlie wanting to care. But all Charlie cares about is Harper, and even that is not a given.
The film tries to be cute with us somewhere along this pathway to nowhere by pointing out how dyslexics can read so long as the first and last letters
are correct. Charlie Harper immediately pivots to relationships, overtly suggesting that as long as it starts and ends correctly, a relationship can be scrambled in the middle, and everything’s cool. OK, well, first, that’s nonsense. The middle is what dictates the end, relationship-wise. Secondly, even in context. This scrambled middle creates a shitty ending, so is the film saying that if we just force Charlie and Harper together by the end of the film, then everything along the way is cool? Because it isn’t and wasn’t.
Obviously, I didn’t like this film. I won’t say there’s no place in the world of storytelling for a doomed romance, but I cannot help wondering who you are trying to appeal to with that kind of story? Indulgent friends? Marriage counselors? Parole officers? Who is this tale for? I might have liked it better if I enjoyed either lead. I did not. This is an adult piece of art, yes. But it should have been re-written several times and given an entirely different plot.
There once was a romantic young pair
On the same page? They weren’t there
On many subjects, they fought
Intense counseling, they ought
But even if they did, I don’t care
Rated R, 102 Minutes
Director: Tom Dean, Mac Elridge
Writer: Tom Dean
Genre: Failed romance
Type of being most likely to enjoy this film: People who have a jones for breakups, maybe?
Type of being least likely to enjoy this film: Hopeless romantics
