Anyone who knows me in person probably knows that I absolutely LOATHE the movie "The Notebook". I remember being in the theater snickering at it's over-the-top attempt at "romance", and then being flabbergasted when the lights went up to find that I was surrounded by knots of weeping women of all different ages. The only reason I didn't walk out was because Ryan Gosling and Rachel McAdams were tolerably watchable good actors thrown in awful roles. I felt like an alien from another planet (well, that happens a lot really, but this time the effect was especially highlighted). Had all good taste left these women?

"The Notebook" went on to become a cult favorite (of some sort), and I'm still wondering why people like the movie so much (and why Nicholas Sparks' books keep getting made into equally crappy movies--and for that matter, why he isn't shelved in the romance section where he belongs -- horrid sexism at work). I'm not against romance per se. Most of the genre is derivative, and on the book side, most volumes amount to what is essentially non-pictographic porn for women (when I was working at the book store, the odd man would buy romance for himself, I sure, finally realizing just how pornographic most of the modern novels tend to be). What they derive from, the macdaddy of all romance stories, is Austen's Pride and Prejudice (or P&P for those in the know), and I am a Jane fan, but that's only because it's one of the best novels ever written. The characters are fully-formed, independent, memorable people. The actual romance takes a back seat to the intensely interesting gender and social political machinations of the time. It's like a tangled ball of yarn for the brain--a lot of entertainment can be unraveled through subsequent reads, and really, that's the locus of any good story, isn't it?

For any of you out there that thought "The Notebook" was somehow good, please, please, please go see "Bright Star" out now in theaters. It's struggling along with a just a few million in receipts after a few weeks in release and it deserves much better. It tells the true story (though probably embellished) of the relationship between poet John Keats and his fiancée Fanny Brawne. I don't want to give away the ending (well, if you know anything about Keats you'll know it already), but let's just say it's satisfyingly fantastic. It's directed with finesse by Jane Campion ("The Piano" another romantic movie worth seeing). The cinematography is so good you could watch the film with no sound and be totally moved. All the characters are interesting and all the actors give excellent performances. It's unfortunate that there aren't any big names, but I have a feeling people will come back to this movie when the actors have become more famous. It's a romantic movie that moves between the realms what is real (in all it's dreariness, grit, minutiae and awkwardness) and what is the real fantasy one can find oneself in when in love. The film succeeds at transferring some of that dreamlike ecstasy to the audience. The last film I saw that captured that mood so well, the internal fantasy of being in love, was "The Piano", and that leads me to believe that Campion can play that note like no other storyteller. Take that Sparks.