showgirl626 I just discovered this movie the other day for the first time. I was flipping through the menu on my TV, saw the description and decided to look in. I missed the first few minutes, but what I saw kept me watching.While I can see what the detractors of this film saw, I also think the criticism is a bit harsh. I did a lot of smiling, and laughed out loud many times.While the movie was packed to the rafters with British heavyweights, few brought their reputations to the roles, and the characters could have easily been played by someone with less star power. However, the Hugh Laurie / Joely Richardson combination worked for me, and Tom Hollander was over-the-top hilarious, even more so for me only previously knowing him in roles where he plays an uptight starchy elitist.Sure the dialogue was a little stilted and artificial in places, some of the jokes juvenile, and I can definitely see where some reviewers thought it sounded like they were reading pages of text verbatim, but I didn't walk away from the movie regretting having watched it. I liked how it poked fun at the British, the BBC, babymaking in general, and I respect that it dared to poke fun at the sacred cows of pregnancy problems and infertility.It was a little indelicate a times, downright ridiculous more than once, but overall the movie was strong enough to hold my attention, and I was entertained. Though I wasn't entirely satisfied with the end, I think it was better than taking the easy way out and having Laurie and Richardson walking off into the sunset pushing a pram.Better than average? Absolutely. Funny? You bet. Pompous? Yeah, a little of that too, but not a clunker by any stretch of the imagination. I liked it. Call me crazy, but I'd watch it again.Thanks for reading.

justincward You can tell that this is going to be a joyless experience by the strangled, off-key gurgling of that trite old Buddy Holly tune by none other than Sir Paul (John owed it all to me) MacCartney, the well known chipmunk-cheeked murderer of music. Of course, Joely Richardson in and out of her knickers and simulating sex, even with Hugh (Doc House) Laurie, is enough to sustain most (straight) men's interest for half an hour, and I suppose (straight) women will enjoy Hugh Laurie 'daringly' being the butt of (predictable) masturbation gags for the same length of time. The gag where she slides off her scooter after visiting the gynecologist is the high spot. By then it should have dawned on anyone that this film has no story, beyond the two elements that are bolted on to keep the non-characters alive: 1) Joely Richardson, in spite of having wild sex five times a day, wants to go over the side with a 'dishy' actor, and 2) Hugh Laurie, whose amphetamine intake is never actually disclosed, is eventually stung into writing a first-time smash-hit film script by a poorly written Scots nuisance who ends up directing it with the dishy actor as lead. The fact of its being based on his wife's oh-so-secret diary causes them to split up for a few months. That's it. End of story. The film starts to drag after the gags have run out - Ben Elton's forte is the half-hour sitcom after all - and as the script descends further into trite, turgid cliché after trite, turgid cliché, a few Shakespeare references are thrown in to show just how pretentious the project is, and all the usual Britflick club members are wheeled out to do their party pieces; they even squeeze in Dawn French, the Paul MacCartney of comedy. By the end Joely Richardson's hips begin to look distinctly childbearing. It's particularly annoying that it's about the very special pain of extremely middle-class people, (the 'park' is an enclosed private condo garden), while the views of the film business that are presumably intended to be satirical only communicate a sort of sleazy tedium. Do they have a baby at the end? ***MAJOR SPOILER TO SAVE NINETY MINUTES OF YOUR LIFE*** Elton doesn't say, they just simulate sex in public a lot more. It's a wind-up.

laurel21000 I got a hold of this film only because I was interested in seeking out more of Hugh Laurie's work. I did not know what to expect - did not even know it was a comedy.And it turned out to be a hoot. One of the funniest films I've seen in a long time. I thought the screenplay was excellent. Fantastically clever dialogue.Now I'm very keen to embark on a quest to unearth whatever else screenwriter and director Ben Elton has done.One of the things I especially liked about how this film was put together was the way it combined absurdity and farce with a more conventional rom-com approach.The cameos by Emma Thompson and Rowan Atkinson were fall-out-of-your-seat hilarious (as were the more lengthy contributions of Matthew Macfadyen). At first I sort of wondered if they would jerk me out of involvement with the story line but they did not.In fact, I think this is a really smart approach to doing a comedy. Too much broad farce in one film can quickly lead to burn-out. But when it's limited for the most part to cameos, it's very welcome and entertaining and enhances rather than detracts from engagement with the plot.The casting in this film was inspired. Joely Richardson was perfect. Matthew Macfadyen could not have been better. James Purefoy was wonderful. As was Adrian Lester.Surprisingly, since it was his work specifically I was initially looking forward to seeing, Hugh Laurie's was the only performance in which I was somewhat disappointed. Laurie seemed to go out of his way to low-key it. I think he chose to go too minimalist in his interpretation of his character. Just my opinion. But hey, Hugh Laurie, even not at his best is still pretty darn terrific.I think writer and director Ben Elton created an exceptionally entertaining and at times very moving film that is very much worth seeing. In fact, I think this film has the potential to have the lifespan and long reach of many of the screwball comedies of the 40s.

Luke Devine The story in this film is a good one, it covers a miserable topic but tries to humour it. "Tries" is the definitive word here; the acting from both lead roles was appalling, I was particularly surprised by Hugh Laurie whose acting I have seen before and has been excellent. The leads, Joely Richardson and Hugh Laurie, acted at best, woodenly. At any potentially humorous or otherwise emotional part the lead would inevitably screw up; either through a bizarre facial expression, a poorly expressed piece of dialogue or just a look of vacant disinterest. Throughout the film you feel that leads' heart are not really in it, they needed some quick money, so they looked for the highest paying script and signed on.The film is one that would have thrived on emotion, alas none is forthcoming.