While men and women are genetically quite similar, they couldn't be more different in a variety of ways. Whether that's due to biology or culture is debatable, and I'm obviously talking about generalizations and even some stereotypes. Yet, when it comes to feelings and expressing emotions, there's a vast difference between the two sexes.
It may take something tragic such as a dog dying or having to part with a beloved car for a man to break down and shed a tear, while a greeting card commercial or kind word can result in the duct release equivalent of Niagara falls in the ladies.
Thus the advent of and reaction to what are commonly known as "chick flicks." Those are films that many women seem to love and most men dread due to them being filled with maudlin, melodramatic and/or soap opera type theatrics that for some reason appeal to the XX chromosome (I guess I just gave away my gender).
With that as an introduction, "The Notebook" definitely falls into the chick flick category. Adapted from Nicholas Sparks' novel of the same name, it's filled with the sort of material that will get many a fan of the genre weepy and have everyone else rolling their eyes or running in horror for the exit. To be fair, the film has some decent individual moments. Yet, as a whole, the effort is episodic, far too predictable (especially in terms of the "big surprise") and has a pace that would embarrass a snail if compared to it.
It also possesses one of those back and forth plots that clearly aren't my favorite. They're the type where contemporary characters talk about and/or mirror ones in the past, and the story thus alternates between showing us the two. That gimmicky gambit usually ruins the momentum of both storylines and only the most skilled touch can pull it off.
Unfortunately, director Nick Cassavetes ("John Q," "She's So Lovely") -- who works from Jan Sardi ("Love's Brother," "Shine") and Jeremy Leven's ("Alex & Emma," "The Legend of Bagger Vance") adaptation of Sparks' novel -- mishandles such switching and most of the material in general.
Perhaps with a great deal more deftness, the big "surprise" in terms of connecting the two stories might have been just that (although I have my doubts). But it's so predictable from the onset that the eventual revelation has no punch and will surprise few if any viewers.
After that, the only "suspense" is pairing up the remaining contemporary character with their predecessor from the other storyline. Considering the genre and overall predictability of the rest of the offering, however, I doubt you could find anyone willing to wager a bet on one of the two choices.
As far as the performances are concerned, Rachel McAdams ("Mean Girls," "The Hot Chick") certainly looks and fits her period part, and is rather good in the role. Her costar, however, is not. Given a contemporary setting, Ryan Gosling's ("Murder By Numbers," "Remember the Titans") portrayal of his 1940s era character might have worked. Yet, set when it is, he feels like a time traveler (in terms of looks, demeanor and attitude) who's arrived in a bygone era and just doesn't fit in.
James Marsden ("Gossip," the "X-Men" movies) works better as Allie's new suitor who must deal with her being torn by thoughts of her former boyfriend. Rounding out the cast from the past is Joan Allen ("The Contender," "Pleasantville"), Sam Shepard ("Black Hawk Down," "Swordfish") and David Thornton ("Swept Away," "John Q"). All are fine with their performances, even if the material with which they must work leaves more than a bit to be desired.
The same holds true for James Garner ("Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood," "Space Cowboys") and Gena Rowlands ("Playing By Heart," "Hope Floats") who play the main characters in the contemporary portion of the story. While both are solid in their portrayals, and have some touching and even heartbreaking moments, they can't escape the maudlin ooze that rises up all around them and eventually suffocates the production.
While I understand that the sappy sentimentalism and melodrama are purposeful, that doesn't mean they work. When combined with a disjointed, episodic and predictable story, the result is one of those films that help in giving the term "chick flick" a bad name and connotation. "The Notebook" rates as a 3.5 out of 10.
![[Screen It]](/images/underground_header.jpg)