New Year's Eve (2011 film)

(Amazon UK link)

We had not heard of the 2011 film ‘New Year’s Eve’; but when I spotted it on special offer (two DVDs for a pound) in a UK charity shop earlier in the year, it wasn’t a difficult decision to buy it. There are some faces and names which even I recognised on the front, and it was directed by Garry Marshall. I don’t usually have any clue who directed a film, but his name has come up on several we have seen in the past few years, often in conjunction with ‘extras’. 

We decided we would watch the film around New Year, to make it somewhat seasonal - and since we had a free evening on December 30th, that’s when we saw it. I had seen some reviews suggesting that it was considered rambling with not much plot. I also saw that it had was considered the worst film of the year by some critics… so we weren’t expecting a whole lot. But a light ‘rom-com’, even if not particularly well-made or amusing, was what we were looking for. 

There’s no ‘main’ character (or characters) in this film, and it’s true that there’s no real plot. It has a large cast and several concurrent storylines, all taking place on New Year’s Eve at the end of 2011. It’s set in New York, and sees a lot of people converging on Times Square. I had heard of the ‘ball drop’ ceremony but had never been sure what it involves. I’m still not sure why it’s such a big deal in New York, but evidently it’s traditional. I also learned that midnight is considered a time for first kisses. 

Life as we know it (Katherine Heigl, Josh Duhamel)

(Amazon UK link)

I don’t remember where ‘Life as we know it’ was recommended to me; perhaps Amazon thought I would like it based on films I have previously enjoyed. Anyway, I had it on my wishlist, and was given it for Christmas last year. We watched with no idea what to expect, although the style of the DVD cover suggested a light rom-com. I don’t usually read the blurb so as not to spoil any surprises.

We found the start of the film a bit confusing, with several young people all speaking very rapidly with strong American accents. Gradually we worked out that there were four main characters: a couple with a baby called Sophie, and their two closest friends who are the baby’s godparents. The only problem is that the godparents - Holly (Katherine Heigl) and Messer (Josh Duhamel) really, really don’t like each other.

Something unexpected and terrible happens, which results in Holly and Messer having to share looking after Sophie, who is just past her first birthday. They both love her, but have no idea how to look after a baby: there are some mildly amusing scenes as they attempt to feed her, change nappies, and so on. It’s quite cute, mainly because Sophie is an absolute delight. Unfortunately there are no extras to this, other than some deleted scenes, as we would have liked a documentary explaining how this worked so very well. However, according to IMDb, baby Sophie was played by triplet sisters, Alexis, Brooke and Brynn Clagett.

The plot is somewhat predictable - gradually the two become more adept at looking after Sophie, excited by her reaching various milestones, and gradually they realise that actually they do rather like each other. There are stresses as they try to juggle their careers and private lives, and some quite amusing scenes involving a social worker Janine (Sarah Burns) who tries to figure out whether or not they should have the care of Sophie - and who is clearly rooting for them, reassuring them that many cases are much more difficult, and that her role is to ensure whatever is best for Sophie.

Overall we thought it well done, made special by the baby. The script works at a good pace, and although there are some irritating parts (from the one-night stands through to trying to feed a year-old toddler blended fruit rather than regular food) it’s mostly a mixture of poignancy and fun. It’s not particularly deep or thought-provoking, and I couldn’t keep track of  everyone’s names (other than Sophie’s) - but it made a good evening’s light viewing. Some of the comic timing was excellent.

The deleted scenes were worth watching - there are quite a few of them, and while a couple are somewhat gross, others add rather nicely to the film; it’s probably right that they weren’t included, but they rounded it out well after seeing the whole.

I expect we’ll watch this again in another five or six years, by which time we’ll have forgotten pretty much everything about it.

The rating is 12 which I think is about right; the intimacies are implied rather than explicit, and there’s not too much bad language. But the theme wouldn’t be of much interest to anyone below the age of about sixteen.

Recommended in a low key way if you want something light with a touch of poignancy.

Review copyright 2022 Sue's DVD Reviews