Too much of everything

Excellent but underrated film

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Harlequin romance movies can be a fun escape, and "This Matter of Marriage" is no exception. From 1998, it stars Leslie Hope, Sherry Miller, Michael Nouri, and Rick Peters. Made in Canada.Hope plays Hallie Mitchell, a 32-year-old with her own architectural design business which she runs with a partner, Donnalee (Sherry Miller, who looks like a blond Mary Tyler Moore). Donnalee wants to get married and have a family and goes the cyberdating route, probably pretty new in 1998, if I recall, and she encourages the independent, strong Hallie to try it.For someone whom we hear so much about not having any action, Hallie has a lot of men around her. There's her neighbor (Rick Peters), unhappily separated from his wife, who is trying to solve a water pressure problem in the building and cope with an unhappy young daughter. There's her cyberdate. There's her old classmate from high school. In her professional life, she's trying to keep the business afloat while she pulls out all the stops to get a big contract.This is a nice film, and young women will relate to the problems of a career, meeting crazies, being afraid of hurt, and a little bit of defensiveness.There's not too much else to say about it. The acting is fine. Pleasant watching.

When I was a youngster, there was a very popular, clever and funny disc jockey on one of our radio stations.One holiday season, the newspaper did a feature story on him. Among its details, it described the upscale neighborhood in which he lived, including that it had some homes which had some of the most elaborate Christmas decorations in the city.The DJ, however, in keeping with his weird sense of humor, had nothing on his house or lawn, except an electric sign which said, "See our exhibit across the street."I'm tempted to say here, with regard to my feelings about this flick, "See the prior comment entered by 'don-249'."I assume that Don is male also. He doesn't say how he came to watch this picture, obviously aimed (as the book genre on which it's based) at the ladies. In my case, it was a Monday morning where I was beat from a weekend which had a lot of unexpected, long work hours, instead of a trip we'd planned - so vegged-out for a couple of hours. This film was beginning, and like some of these Lifetime offerings, I'll watch for a bit, and then become fascinated enough to continue - "a few minutes at a time" - until all of a sudden, the two hours has elapsed.Again, read "Don's" comments and ditto them, completely, for me. I'd add that, of course, the leads are Canadian, the film was made in Canada, and the Lifetime Channel obviously is probably among of the top five or so elements supporting Canada's economy, with the network's movie-making there.The lead gals were likable, but both of them, along with the neighbor (and most of the remainder of the cast) could best be summed-up a "pleasant, amiable doophuses" (or is it doophii?).The most memorable aspect of the film, and the one facet worthy of a superlative, would be that the two neighbors' continuing "plumbing situation" has to be the lamest, most tiresome, contrived gimmick in the history of stage, film or print.The best summation for the movie, for me, would be, "There are worse ways to spend a couple of hours."

The acting was excellent but sabotaged by a poorly-written story. Too bad because the basic idea was good but the details stunk.For example: They went to the well way too many times with the plumbing problem as an excuse to have them drop in on one another. How lame.And the initial building proposal was absurd. There was nothing original there - just some towers. How did a proposal for an office building suddenly become a proposal for a community? But by far the worst was when the hero showed no interest whatsoever in her career ("So you're an architect. So how's the weather?") until later in the movie, he's basically drooling over her community design. It wasn't bad acting; it was bad writing.It was apparent these two had nothing in common other than living next door. She had no experience with relationships. He had one experience - and didn't understand why it failed. And there wasn't even a glimmer of sexual passion between them. Prediction: One year max before they get divorced.What a sad waste of good acting in a terrible movie.

Leslie Hope shines in this watchable if predictable TV movie. She is very convincing in her role as an architect who cannot find love until it turns up at her door, well next-door. There are many strands to the story, some are left unexplored while others take center stage; yet what holds it together is Hope's charming performance. She rises above the predictable material and never overacts. We can sympathize with her character. The story itself is obvious from the beginning but the tone is typically Canadian - low-key and unsentimental. This low-key tone is quite unusual for a Harlequin film, but it's part of its charm even though it feels like a soap opera most of the time.