Maybe Baby (2000)

That was an excellent one.

Thanks for the memories!

Pretty Good

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

And I kinda sorta did.But there were lots I didn't like too. The movie couldn't make up its mind what it wanted to be, comedy, drama, romance, wevs. It dragged atrociously in the wrong places, and galloped through more sensitive scenes. And why oh why in heaven's name was Rowan Atkinson cast in the part of an ObGyn and all he can manage is make like Mr. Bean down to the mouthy business, this was out and out farce and completely out of sync with the rest of the film.Hugh Laurie could stand and stare at paint drying and I would still watch him but here again, there is major script letdown.And seriously a major invasion of his wife's privacy? I'd call that monstrous and a total dealbreaker.And I could not get excited about Emma Thompson in a role out of her reach as some kind of hippy-dippy clairvoyanty soothsayer. Did not buy. Natasha was lovely and witty but the director could have reigned her in as at times she was way over the top.There was a beautiful movie in there dying to get out. But not in all their hands unfortunately.Too bad.5 out of 10

If you ever get into an argument about whether writers should be allowed to adapt their own books (based on their own life experiences) for the screen - and then get to direct what they have written, then cite this movie as an example as to why it should never be allowed.The basic premise of the movie is fine: a couple cannot conceive. They undergo IVF. He writes a film script based on the experience without telling her, reading her secret diary to get "the woman's angle". She finds out. They separate but are reconciled.Where the film fails (and this is where my argument about letting writers direct comes in) is in the dialogue. The speeches in this thing are so stodgy. So wordy. Everything sounds like it came straight off the page of the book. Everybody talks all the time in well rounded complete paragraphs. Speeches that might read well on the page of a novel will sound clumsy and stilted if acted without some revision, cutting, some paring down. In real life, people just don't talk like they do in books. In real life, people just don't talk like they do in this movie - not even smug rich London media types. There was no natural rhythm to the conversations and I felt really sorry for the actors having to deliver this stuff, and they had to deliver so much of it. The performances suffered as a result. No one was believable in their characters except maybe Adrian Lester, who has a talent for shining out in bad British movies. He shone out again, solely I suspect by virtue of having some of the shortest lines in the whole thing.The music was pretty dreadful too - especially the moment when, abandoned by his wife, Hugh Laurie has to stand there being miserable with Westlife telling us he's miserable on the soundtrack. WE GET THE MESSAGE!Ben Elton is, famously, one of the father figures of the "Alternative Comedy" boom back in the Eighties which lambasted the cosy unreal clichéd world that British comedy had become. It's sad then to see him turn out this bloated unamusing movie which is about as unfunny, and unconnected from reality as any episode Terry and June (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0135736/). It runs for 101 minutes and feels like half that again. The whole movie is about babies, and one thing I do know about babies is they grow up. They become their own people, start to live lives of their own. Elton should have let his baby go. In the hands of a scriptwriter and a director who could step back from the story and take a more objective approach this could have been a really good film.

A very ordinary romantic comedy with very little to redeem it. Main joy in the watching is spotting almost every British comedy actor of the day playing some sort of minor role. Apart from the "ooh look, isn't that . . ." factor there is a very good performance from Joely and Hugh Laurie is his usual sparkling self. However, in the end, the rough and somewhat unsuccessful script just doesn't fill one with enough laughs, thrills and empathy. One most wonder if in fact it is a good idea to write a comedy script about a couple struggling with infertility - perhaps as one of the character's puts it, it isn't very funny after all.

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.