Friends With Kids

Logline: Two best friends decide to have a child together while keeping their relationship platonic, so they can avoid the toll kids take on romantic relationships.

Cast: Adam Scott, Jennifer Westfeldt, Kristen Wiig, Jon Hamm, Megan Fox, Edward Burns, Chris O'Dowd, Maya Rudolph

Directed by: Jennifer Westfeldt

 

Why choose to review Friends With Kids?

Well, anyone who stopped watching movies and TV in the past few years might not know it, but this cast list is filled with actors that have flown by under the radar. Everyone knows their faces, but I bet not many could attach names to them or vice versa. Hell, the movie itself actually flew under the radar...why am I continuing to 

prove this point?

For anyone who hasn't seen The Vicious Kind, you haven't really gotten a look at what Adam Scott has to offer yet. The film also features three stars from the hit movie Bridesmaids, Jennifer Westfeldt who acts AND directs, Edward Burns who is always forgotten about, Megan Fox being of the most attractive actresses EVER, and a man who needs no introductions as his TV series Mad Men just broke the record for Emmy nominations, Jon Hamm.

Pretty stacked full of people that not many people know of just yet or haven't seen in awhile.

So how did it work out?

Jason and Julie are neighbours and long time friends. They've never been intimate, never shared feelings for one another, but as friends they love each other. Their lives become altered when their two sets of friends decide it's time to have kids. Why would things change? Because any couple that has children inevitably sacrifices most of their free time to raise them. Jason and Julie find themselves constantly ditched at dinner reservations and at one point Jason's birthday is even forgotten about. Are they mad? 

Not really.

However, Julie is unsatisfied because she is reaching the point in her life where her birth clock starts to tick and time is of the essence. Casually dating has gotten her nowhere up to this point and she fears never being able to have a child. Jason is at the point in his life where he'd like to have a child too, but unlike Julie, he is completely content with dating as many women as possible. The two realize that they are in similar situations and decide that they could have a baby and not succumb to the inevitable sacrifice of romance that comes along with conception.

Their friends get offended that they think of them this way, but agree to support them.

Just like that, they have sex, cut to 9 months later & a baby is BORN.

Now what? We as the audience want to see how this is going to work.  

It wouldn't really be a movie if it doesn't work, right? The story needs conflict. How does this film go about introducing that? Well, pretty much just as any "friends with benefits" movies go.

The movie contains comical scenes and all, but I chose not critique it on that as comedy is the most subjective thing for critics to touch. Instead, I'll review the actual story.

Jason finds the stunning Mary Jane (played by Megan Fox) and very quickly falls in love with her. He thinks she is the one. When Julie finds out, she begins to get jealous of this. She sees Jason with the baby and how much he cares, she starts to think dating is pointless because she has everything she's ever wanted right in front of her, etc. Jason senses her jealousy and sets her straight. So, Julie begins dating a man named Kurt (Edward Burns) who is an absolute perfect model of a man for her; for any woman really. Mary Jane is turned off by the idea that Jason shares a kid and always puts herself and her acting career ahead of him and the baby. In fact, she finds children repulsive and never wants to have them. 

Jason begins to get jealous when he realizes how good of a man Kurt is.

Then the best scene in the entire movie happens.

Jon Hamm's character confronts Julie and Jason at a Christmas dinner table up at one of their cottages. He blames both of them for what's going to happen to the child when he grows older and begins to question why both of his parents aren't always around, shoving it in their faces that they made a completely selfish decision. Jason fires back at him stating that his relationship isn't something to be proud of either, as we noticed throughout the film, his wife becomes progressively unhappy with every scene we see her. Jason sticks up for Julie and claims that he loves her and has for his entire life.

This causes 2 things.

1) John Hamm to get divorced.

2) Julie invites Jason out to dinner.

At this dinner Julie confesses her love for him too and tries to kiss him, but he immediately stops her and tells her he didn't mean it in that way. To Julie this was a bombshell that she didn't see coming. She moves away from her apartment next to him, but close enough so that split-custody works, and keeps minimal contact.

This is the darkest hour part of the film as it shows scenes of her being depressed and scenes of Jason and Mary Jane continuing their relationship as complete opposites.

Jason realizes he made a big mistake.

To keep consistent, even though I basically gave away a lot of the movie in my review, I won't reveal the ending.

So, what can we take from Friends With Kids?

Don't have kids till marriage. You cannot cheat the system. If you could, there wouldn't be a system.

With such a big cast, there were a lot of characters to introduce. Luckily, this film knew how to do it RIGHT. Most movies that contain this many characters with stars attached to their names devote a big chunk of the runtime to introduce them all. This one doesn't. Most of the friends and minor characters are used for comedic relief. The film hinted at many small things with the minor the characters and it was easy to judge them based off of that - this helped the pace of the movie stay somewhat fluent.

The screenwriting was formula. Background - idea - debate - idea happens - conflict - midpoint crisis - all is lost - conclusion.

It all sounds pretty good up to this point no? Well, it floated. What do I mean by floated? I mean the story jumps over periods of time a lotttt. The story has no real time constraint to it. I was never sure when this was going to end and at times felt that conflict didn't pull me in. Both character's goals were made clear: have a child without sacrificing romance. It was obvious this wasn't going to happen. It was also obvious that one would fall for the other, it was just a matter of which fell first. It floated because some of the story was predictable, other parts were clutter, and sometimes the comedy was generic and bland, but I won't go there.

This film generated a cast full of really underrated actors, but didn't necessarily need to. But who am I to say that? I think the cast list is what drove me to watching this movie to begin with. So yeah, it got me there, but when I finished I was wondering why some of them even accepted a role so small. Yes, introducing too many characters and having too much emphasis on too many things is confusing and long, so its best the film didn't take that route, but that also makes for less than memorable performances throughout. I barely remember Kristen Wiig speaking a word. Weird, no?

This is a decent film to pop on when there is nothing else to watch. Adam Scott continues to impress me. Well acted, a bunch of time jumps, and a formulaic plot that stimulates some laughs and a very intense argument at Christmas dinner.

6/10