Hearts, But No Minds

I thought my post for "Valentine's Day" would be short and sweet. Something like, "Well, it ain't no 'Love Actually'", but as it turns out, there's a lot to say about this film. First, let's look at the cast list from these two films.
"Love Actually"
Emma Thompson
Alan Rickman
Hugh Grant
Bill Nighy
Colin Firth
Liam Neeson
Kiera Knightly

Okay, now "Valentine's Day"
Ashton Kutcher
George Lopez
Jessica Biel
Jennifer Garner
Queen Latiffa
Topher Grace
Tyler Lautner
McDreamy
McSteamy

See? The Valentine's bunch aren't exactly from the RADA graduation list. Why remake what some think is the best romantic comedy ever made if right from the casting process you decide you can never be as good? The purpose here isn't storytelling, it's copy catting. It's cashing in on someone else's great idea and excellent execution. Shame on everyone associated with the making of this movie.
The first finger-pointing should be at the producers for lack of imagination and sheer greed, but once you get past that, a question remains. What the hell is Garry Marshall thinking? I have never seen such clunky staging and awkward chemistry that actually made it in to the final cut. Granted the clunky dialogue doesn't help but come on. Was he running out of film? Now it's is no easy task, directing-wise, to keep this many story lines bouncing in the air (and let me tell you, there are a LOT of story lines). But this structure is lifted directly from "Love, Actually" so he's not exactly reinventing the wheel. Garry Marshall is just a caricature of himself as a director, incapable of bring any honesty or emotion to the scenes. Instead he relies on goofy tricks and inside jokes like an airport scene that has drivers holding up signs for "Unger" and "Madison". Please. The direction is just inexplicably goofy.
There are simply too many actors to go through the the yea's and nay's of performance, and since no one is really trying it seems doubly pointless (although trotting out Shirley MacLaine and Hector Elizando like they were museum pieces seems particularly egregious) but I'd like to say something about the big debut of Taylor Swift since she seems destined to be one of those cross-over stars. There are two teen girl roles in this film. One is a character role, a ditzy cheerleader type, no not type, she is ACTUALLY a ditzy cheerleader. The other is a straight forward virgin considering sex for the first time. Marshall cast Swift in the character role, a part that isn't even close to who she is. Swift has no experience and apparently no direction so what you get is a cliche ridden throw-away. Swift isn't good but it is not her fault. She was used. She was sand-bagged. She deserved better for her first role. Now, since I am not a teen girl (I'm the opposite) I took the time to see what all this Taylor Swift fuss was about. I listened to some of her music and let me tell you, her pop/country lyrics have more insight into young love than this movie ever does by a long shot. Forget the role, they should have had her work on the script.
It pisses me off that this film is making money. The producers don't deserve it. It relies on a pop culture audience that doesn't know any better, but I guess it's working. It's for people who don't know or don't care a thing about what love is, actually.