'The Vow' promises to bore audiences

By Shivani Morrison     2/22/12 6:00pm

Michael Sucsy's (Grey Gardens) romantic drama The Vow is intended to lure couples wrapped up in the Valentine's Day season and looking for an excuse to hold hands. Unfortunately, not even Bridget Jones would willingly watch this movie on a lonely Saturday night. The hand-holding, heart-clutching, sigh-inducing kind of romance that The Vow aspires to be depends on one thing above all: scenes of dialogue brimming with chemistry. However, that chemistry is lacking in The Vow, and unfortunately, the only sighs the film prompts are those of frustration and boredom.

The film focuses on a young married couple, Paige (Rachel McAdams, The Notebook)  and Leo (Channing Tatum, Dear John). One night, a truck rear-ends the couple's car, injuring Paige. When she wakes up, she cannot recall the last five years of her life, including her entire relationship with Leo. Paige struggles to find her identity, torn between the poised suburbanite law student she remembers being and the free-spirited artist her husband claims she is.  

At the beginning of the film, McAdams and Tatum lack the comfortable, easy chemistry that a married couple should exhibit, especially for one supposedly so wildly in love. Although she correctly times her girlish grins and flirtatious giggles, McAdams' performance as Paige is strangely hollow. In fact, the two actors seem to be in different rooms altogether. They fail to connect with each other on any meaningful level and instead seem to employ the over-calculated flirtation tactics they have each practiced in front of their mirrors. The only authentic interaction between the two occurs when a piece of food flies out of Paige's mouth at the dinner table and the two laugh about her clumsiness — a moment I am almost certain was not in the script.

---

---

After the accident, when Paige cannot remember the man she married or who she is, she becomes cold, high-strung, frustrating and unlikeable, and I am left not caring all that much about whether or not Leo wins her back. Tatum plays the role of doting husband decently well, if a little unimaginatively. His occasional outbursts are only manifestations of how fiercely he loves his wife despite her amnesia. Too bad the character of a sweet meat-head humbled by love is all too familiar.    

Perhaps, though, the dry performances of the actors are just the result of trite and repetitive dialogue. Paige and Leo's vows are the most meaningful things they say to each other in the film, and we know this because they repeat them three or four times. It seems, and so the title would imply, that the meaning of their relationship is written in those vows — a reasonable assumption for a happily married couple. The trouble is that, besides the vows themselves, the film's dialogue does not portray either character as nearly articulate enough to have written these vows.   

One of the main problems with the film is the over-stereotyping of Paige's two worlds: the suburban aristocracy of her parents and la vie bohème with Leo. These stereotypes are mostly manifested in Paige's wardrobe. In her life as a loving daughter and law student, Paige's wardrobe consists of polished dresses and straightened hair, whereas once she becomes an artist she lets her hair curl and wears more layers.  It is hard to believe that Paige would suddenly discover something as simple as a rebellion in style so late in her life. Furthermore, her stylistic changes are never explained beyond that they seem to better befit an artist.

That being said, McAdams and Tatum are a pleasure to look at, and Sucsy knows to spotlight her cute little dimples and his impressive abdomen. It is touching that the film is based on a true story, but if you are looking for the kind of film that makes your heart leap and your eyes tear, save $10 and trust the tried-and-true classics of the Valentine's season — the ones of which Bridget Jones ?would approve.

---