The "Friends" are in need. The cinematic output of television's most appealing ensemble cast has been pretty pathetic thus far, and the verdict is in: When it comes to plopping down seven dollars to see the toothsome six on the big screen, chances are we won't be there for them.
To be fair, there have been signs of hope here and there, most noticeably from Courtney Cox's end. Her sharp delivery made her character in the "Scream" films more fun than any of the others, but her TV castmates have relied too much on playing characters similar to their "Friends" roles in films that are not nearly as good as what we can see them in on the tube for free.
What's a Friend to do? If you're Jennifer Aniston, you'll take a cue from Cox and try to expand your range while at the same time attempting to restore the nation's faith in the Friends' ability to make good movies. And, for the most part, you'll succeed.
With "The Object of My Affection," Aniston ventures far away from Rachel territory. In "Object," Aniston plays social worker Nina Borowski, a woman who is dating a jerk lawyer but finds a soulmate in her friend George (Paul Rudd from "Clueless"), who happens to be gay. As time passes, Nina falls in love with her friend, and when she learns that she is pregnant with the lawyer's child, she wants George to act as the father.
On paper, Aniston's character sounds unbelievably naive, and the first few scenes of the film do nothing to establish the audience's faith in Nina. A bunch of unbelievably dopey and awkward scenes at the start of the movie revolve around Nina talking with the teens that she counsels.
Seen hanging out with a bunch of young girls, Aniston announces that she "likes sex as much as the next girl" and proceeds to teach the horny young things about self-respect. It's a miracle that the film turns out to be pretty good after all.
Other stumbling blocks in the film include the over-emphasis of cutesiness (way too many close-ups of children) and poor setting choices (emotional revelations on a roller coaster?).
Flaws aside, the film somehow manages to get all of the important stuff right. The film's strength lies in its handling of the impossibility of romance between Nina and George, and it never cops out on that regard.
Nina's fixation on George is part idealism, part self-destruction, part denial. George's attraction to Nina is composed of similar ingredients, but it's always obvious who has more at stake.
As the heart and soul of this picture, Aniston makes a remarkable impression. Her affection for George is not a puppy-dog crush, but is played as something more desperate and needy. Unlike other Hollywood cuties like Meg Ryan and Sandra Bullock, she also brings a potent, natural sex appeal to her work. Aniston has obviously graduated from someplace other than the smile-grin-smile-beam school of acting, and her performance shows it.
Rudd is also very good in the crucial role of George. Too often in films like this the male lead that the female lead works herself into a tizzy over hardly seems worth the effort, but Rudd is likable, warm and convincing -- a perfect match for Aniston.
The rest of the cast is also strong, especially Nigel Hawthorne, who has a small role as an old drama critic who loves a young actor that he cannot have. The similarities between his relationship with the young man and Nina's relationship with George are striking. The scene in which Hawthorne's character warns Nina that she should not design her life in such a way that leaves her wide open to the possibility of abandonment is truly touching -- the best in the film.
Given the complexity of the situations presented, it may seem odd that the film wraps everything up so tidily in the last few minutes. Fortunately, this is the rare film where the mostly happy ending seems believable and well-earned. Despite her attachment to George, Nina is not so self-destructive and insecure that she will allow her life to fall to pieces on behalf of a failed stab at romance. Sometimes things do work out in real life, and in this case a downer ending for art's sake would have been a poor decision.
Despite its occasionally sappy and contrived moments, this film has its heart in the right place and the things that it does well are far more crucial than the things that it does poorly. All in all, one small step for the modern romantic drama, one giant leap for TV's most famous hairdo.
