Letters To Juliet is the sort of film thats likely to divide audiences. Youre either going to find it cheesy, insipid tosh or leave with a rosy glow in your heart. However, with a romantic-chick-lit title like Letters To Juliet, thats probably how it should be.
Based on the fact that over the years women really have written letters to the fictional heroine of Romeo & Juliet and posted then into the wall under the place that was supposedly her Veronese balcony, Letters To Juliet sees Amanda Seyfrieds as Sophie, an American in Italy, who comes across one of these letters when she meets a group of women called Juliets Secretaries, who gather up the romantic missives and write replies. In the letter Sophie gets hold of, which has languished unanswered for half a century, a young British girl expresses her feelings about the young Tuscan boy she met and fell for, before leaving him behind when she got cold feet.
Then things take an only in the movies turn, when Sophie decides to write to the now middle-aged woman, Claire (Vanessa Redgrave), which immediately causes her to hop on the next plane to Verona. Claire also brings her grandson, Charlie(Christopher Egan), with her, presumably because movie law demands Seyfried gets a potential love interest or two as well, especially considering the movie is clear from the outset that her current fiancé (Gael Garcia Bernal), is not right for her. And in paradoxical movie fashion, we know Charlie is Mr. Right, because he instantly dislikes Sophie on meeting her (although that of course will change).
Once all this is set up, its a bit like a join the dots puzzle, as Sophie, Charlie and Claire head off to find the man Claire left behind all those years ago, stopping off along the way for the prerequisite ups, downs and difficulties, before trundling towards the conclusion youve known was coming all along.
As I said, even the slightly cynical will find it insultingly predictable, pallid, ridiculous and full of paper-thin characters who if you met them in real life, youd find them wet and tedious. Yet the film is so careful not to offend, put the characters in too much jeopardy (emotional or otherwise), and goes about things so efficiently, that its almost feels like youre being wrapped in comforting blanket, where you know whats going to happen and are merely happy for the fantasy to be fulfilled in such a pleasant, undemanding way.
Its helped in this by wallowing in the Italian scenery. Italy is a country that Hollywood loves not just because of its reputation for romance, but because its a modern nation where you can carefully place your camera to suggest it sits outside time. Except for the lack of corsets, this could be the Italy of EM Forster, as rarely does a sign on the modern world sneak into the camera frame. Its a place where anything could happen, and it can do so while looking ridiculously picturesque.
Amanda Seyfried seems to be becoming the queen of these verge-of-tears romances (with occasional deviations such as Jennifers Body), and with her big round eyes and vulnerability shes certainly good at it. Itd just be nice if she can find scripts that go beyond working efficiently and actually delve deep into the profound mysteries of the human heart.
Overall Verdict: A daft, sentimental movie-land romance, but which looks so pretty and works so efficiently its difficult not to smile at it.
Reviewer: Phil Caine