Expected more

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Parker Posey very good, as usual, appearing, as usual, in a unique, funny, provocative, offbeat story. Margaret's reality rarely meets her expectations (she's a novelist). In love and monogamous, jealousy drives her to seek an affair. Of course she finds this more complicated than she expected. Margaret's monogamy is ironic given her enormous likability. Maybe that's what makes her so likable. She doesn't settle for what she's offered; she strives for what she wants. Parker Posey's performance can be compared with her equally powerful performance in "Personal Velocity," a more realistic look at infidelity. Very good dialogue; reminiscent of the "screwball" comedy genre, or something from the more "mature" Woody Allen. So not meant to be realistic, although I have known a few people like these. I really liked it.

***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** My word, this was one horrid little flick. I figured, with Posey and Northam, this might be pretty good. Wrong! Maggie's misadventures are completely of her own doing, and she is the single most unsympathetic character I've seen in quite some time. ***SPOILERS*** Posey meets Northam in Paris, sleeps with him, and then discovers the next day that he's English (oops! She really wanted a Frenchman). So, of course, they decide to get married for some reason. Then, the movie jumps ahead 7 years for some reason, perhaps because the makers felt it would be impossible to develop these characters in any way, as just a few minutes in, you already are asking, "WTF?". While Margaret is a complete psycho, and her husband seems to be the only thing holding her together, she decides she must cheat on him. We're never given any reasons why, unfortunately, but hey, why bother with little details like that? She runs off to France, gets drunk, and tries to bone a Frenchman, but he just puts her to bed--she's furious! Why kind of frog doesn't want to sleep with the crazy married drunk American he just met? She also tries to seduce her dentist, her sister's girlfriend, and the Frenchman yet again, for reasons unknown, failing every time. So, she tries the dentist again, with success! But now, she's still unhappy (poor dear--perhaps her podiatrist would have solved her problems). She then runs to France again, where her husband (inexplicably) woos her back. THE END. This movie had no character development, no common sense, no one to like, and no reason to exist. The pretentious flashbacks to lovers in jolly Olde England were particularly wretched. The only redeeming quality about this film was seeing Posey's bare breasts for a solid 30 seconds.

Spoilers herein.Rich potential: New York a la Woody; writer creating her own life; snappy dialog; sex as philosophy, set in a `perils of Pauline' context with anachronisms as a running joke. But the New York wasn't bookish and chic enough. It failed like the recent `Great Expectations.' The attempt at snappy dialog was energetic, but the cadence was all wrong, and that makes up for even the grandest stretch in the words. `An Ideal Husband,' is the recent example of perfection of this art. The problem isn't Parker. It's the director.I'm particularly attracted to films that fold reality in themselves: plots where the story involves its own creation. These abound in several forms, and some indie films have actually explored new territory recently (`eXistenZ,' `Memento,' and `Mulholland Drive' come to mind.) But this offers nothing new, so it is doomed to be compared to other examples of the same.Parker is a conundrum. I think she has a good instrument, rather flexible. I've seen her in 11 of her 37 listed film projects, which I think is comparatively high given the poor circulation of many. Never brilliant, she's been adequate and varied. I think she would have been up to this if she were directed to be less frantic and unappealing. And if the director knew how to clip the dialog like Jennifer Leigh in `Hudsucker,' or James Woods in `True Crime,' or Robert DuVall in `The Paper.'

There is nothing new about a film where a happily married couple split up; not because they don't love each other, but because of the crazy friends/circumstances who surround them. Every decade there are at least 2 dozen such films. "His Girl Friday" and "The Last Married Couple In America" come to mind. And truthfully, there is nothing is this screenplay that makes this film special. It is, however, saved by a throughly delightful cast and a director who was not too heavy on the schmaltz; although the kooky does get to be a bit much. If you interested in a pleasant diversion, you could to worse than see this film.