Which do u guys think is better? Both have Hugh Grant in it and Richard Curtis writing. They also have that similar theme to it. Personally I think Love Acutally is better. How about you all?
shareFour Weddings....
WYSYHYG
FOUR WEDDINGS FOR SURE
shareLove Actually has the the more generous, idealistic basis (i.e., that love, whether it's between friends, spouses, family members, and so forth, is everywhere, and we should embrace and celebrate that).
But Four Weddings and a Funeral is undoubtedly the better movie. The characters are developed with more of an economy of dialogue (more "show," less "tell"), it's well-paced, and it manages to inspire laughter and tears. The editing and direction are also far superior to Love Actually.
On top of that, Four Weddings introduces just enough in the way of storylines and then ties them all up. Love Actually takes a kitchen sink approach and becomes rather weighed down. So many characters are introduced, it's hard to get a real sense of each. Four Weddings manages to make the viewer care about everybody in Charles's circle of friends.
Both films, however, stretch credibility to its absolute limit, but don't dwell on that, just enjoy. It's a Richard Curtis thing!
Stamp out silly threads! How many "so-and-so looks just like so-and-so" discussions do we need?
Love Actually.
shareAbout the same for me, both enjoyable and with humour but neither completely satisfying.
Love Actually was fun but I didn't like all the stories. Just hated the English guy going to get girlfriends in America bit. I really like Laura Linney but I was so frustrated with her character for being so trapped by her brother and not grabbing some life for herself. I loved the Colin Firth part but it was all too short and shallow and I would have liked a whole movie just about that love story! Bill Nighy was great!
If Four Weddings had a better main female character/actress it would probably win my vote. The way the group of friends and acquaintances and their various relationships with each other were portrayed was very real to me.
I'll go for...Four Weddings. I think Four Weddings is a 'tighter' movie, script-wise. Love Actually is a good Christmas movie though. In fact, I prefer Notting Hill to both of them!
shareI first fell in love with Hugh Grant's acting in Four Weddings; I've loved him in everything since. I love both Four Weddings and Love Actually; can't say I like one better than the other. They are very different - "Weddings" has time to develop the characters and story line more, but in "Love" the stories are very clever and touching and I think they DO come together in an interesting way.
I enjoyed both, but liked Four Weddings better; I always cry when 'Stop All The Clocks' is read at Garrett's funeral.
shareFour Weddings. Love Actually has some great stuff in it, but way too many characters, leaving the movie wide and mostly shallow. The more interesting story lines got short shifted.
Four Weddings has many subplots but it seems to work.
Also, Love Actually kept insisting that a normal-sized woman was fat, which was depressing. Unless you're borderline anorexic, you should just kill yourself seems to be the repeated underlying theme to the movie. That's a shame when the rest of the movie is so upbeat. Yes there is a weight problem in the UK and US, but the weight obsession in the movie gives it a shallow, bitter, cruel aftertaste when it's supposed to be all about love.
@laura-grey
Regarding your complaints about calling that one girl "fat" or saying she had huge thighs. The point was that the women of the movie kept putting her down, but the men (both Hugh Grant and the American President) were very attracted to her. So the movie wasn't insulting her for her weight at all. If anything, they were making fun of women's harsh treatment of themselves and others regarding weight.
I enjoyed Love Actually a lot and was looking for something similar in Four Weddings which I did not find. The humor didn't really agree with me and I only found one or two characters sympathetic (hint, neither of them were the romantic leads). So as of now I'm still searching for a good romantic comedy (if you looked at that phrase and said to yourself "oxymoron" than leave me alone... I'm depressed), so if any of you have a recommendation that's more in the vein of Love Actually, please do tell me about it.
I'm just throwing this out there, but you might like A GOOD YEAR with Russell Crowe and Marion Cotillard. There are some excellent supporting players as well and the ambiance is delicious. Not at all like LOVE ACTUALLY but a delightful romcom. I loved it.
share@morningsidemary
Why thank you. I'll check that out.
This is my signature; it's not the last sentence of my comment... or is it...
I'd certainly throw Notting Hill into the comparison as well. I would probably put Love Actually at the top of my list, with FWF and NH tied for a close second. I think the Grant-Curtis combination usually make for good movies ... nothing earth-shaking, but always enjoyable.
shareLove Actually, hands down, IMHO. Mainly because it doesn't have Andi McDowell in it. But seriously, the story is tighter, and it's just a more joyous, funny and touching film. Perhaps if Mike Newell had found a way to cast Bill Nighy in 4 Weddings, it might have gone the other way, however...
shareBill Nighy instead of Andie MacDowell? Now, that's a spicy meatball....
WYSYHYG
Four Weddings obviously
shareOh no, Love Actually is FAR better. Even if one can overlook Andie McDowell's abysmal performance, which I can't, the writing is much tighter on LA, as are the performances by Britain's stellar performers, none of whom appear in FW&aF, who absolutely make the film. FW&aF is a darling bit of fluff (sans Ms. McDowell), but can't measure up to the stories in LA, which are, for the most part, truly human (witness Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson). True, greying Hughbiquitous' hair MIGHT have made him more belivable as PM and getting rid of Billy Bob Thornton as the American President would definitely haved raised the tenor of that particular story. Otherwise, however, LA gets the frequent play here, NOT it's silly predecesor.
share[deleted]