The trouble with Hugh. January 27, 2009

I have a confession to make. And for those who know me well, it will be deeply shocking, so prepare yourselves.

 

Ready?

 

Yesterday I voluntarily subjected myself to a film in which Hugh Grant appears.

 

For those not yet in the know, and who are wondering why on earth this is cause for such an apparently dramatic statement and a painful public confession, allow me to explain. For a good number of years I have had a strict NO HUGH policy.

 

I will not watch Hugh. Here’s why…

 

Many moons ago I came to the realisation that watching Hugh just made me angry and irritated. He was so frequently entirely blithering and pathetic. Type casting? Perhaps. He made me ashamed to be English. And for those who will point to Bridget Jones in his defence, granted Daniel Cleaver is not quite so apologetic and wishy washy as his average character, but he is somehow still intensely annoying.  So the solution to my problem with Hugh was simple – I would never again watch him in anything at all ever.

 

Now the situtation for Hugh is perhaps not aided by my distinct lack of appreciation for most modern “romantic comedies”. To say I dislike the genre completely would not be entirely true. I just think that most of what the film industry churns out in this vein nowadays either fails to be romantic, or funny, or both. They are, generally, utterly formulaic nonsense designed to part women from their money and their senses. Back in the day they used to make great romantic comedies, which were also great films. The Philadelphia Story, Bringing Up Baby, Some Like It Hot… Funny, witty, charming, great scripts and top class actors.

 

There are still a few good rom-coms around. I have on my shelf Pride & Prejudice and 10 Things I Hate About You, and would merrily rewatch 13 Going on 30 and even The Devil Wears Prada. But if you consider just how many chick-flick-rom-com-lame-half-hearted-efforts studios turn out every year, the ones I like are very few and far between. Richard Curtis has never convinced me… Four Weddings and a Funeral? Love Actually? Notting Hill? Ug. Perhaps it’s not his fault though. I mean, Black Adder and Vicar of Dibley were fantastic! And didn’t star Hugh Grant. Interesting that.

 

I seem to have wandered from my original point somewhat. I broke the policy. I watched Hugh. And actually, I quite enjoyed Sense and Sensibility. Hugh doesn’t have much screen time and when he did pop up and fail repeatedly to spit his words out,  I was placated by the fact that one of my housemates joined me in my loudly expressed despair of his ever learning how to end a sentence.

 

Where this leaves me with my policy now, I cannot say. Perhaps there is a little room for manoeuvre. Perhaps not. Maybe if it’s a Jane Austen adaptation it’s OK??

 

I leave you with this final thought. How much better would every film Hugh Grant has ever made be, if they had only cast Sean Bean instead?