According to the credits, 4 men were responsible for this story and one of them teamed with another guy to write the script. Add in the director and at least 6 dudes had a hand in crafting this very female-centric film. How do you think that worked out? There are plenty of examples of one man with a singular vision writing a great story about women. Even two fellows combining their talents to spin a yarn about the fairer sex is somewhat common. But when 12 testicles try to create a romantic-comedy with half a dozen significant female characters and a leading man who's barely more than eye candy, the result has all the tenderness of an assembly line and as much charm as a baseball player scratching his crotch.
You can forgive the conceit that Monica Potter is playing an average woman who moves in with 4 fashion models. I mean, this is Hollywood so a standout beauty like Potter is as close to average as their tiny brains can come. You can even forgive the models being played as the sympathetic cheering section for Potter's character, even though they're portrayed as stupid, shallow and materialistic. Though inappropriate for their role, that's far more personality than "best friend" characters usually get in rom-coms. What you can't forgive is how Head Over Heels is clearly broken up into three sections that are practically different genres.
It starts out with 30 minutes that includes almost every rom-com cliché, including the woman walking in on her cheating boyfriend, a makeover musical montage and a romantic misunderstanding. That segues into a half hour parody of "women in peril" flicks, though somewhat in reverse. Here, the woman sees the guy kill someone and then falls in love with him. Everything wraps up with 30 minutes of action-comedy involving international smuggling, fisticuffs at a fashion show and a cunnilingus sight gag. Not a brief one, either. The bit goes on for the better part of 30 seconds in a PG-13 film. That must have been a proud day for the motion picture ratings board.
Amanda (Monica Potter) is an art restorer with terrible judgment about men. When she catches her latest boyfriend cheating on her, she needs a new place to stay and gets taken in by 4 models (Shalom Harlow, Ivana Milicevic, Sarah O'Hare and Tomiko Fraser). Amanda is weak kneed at the sight of a handsome stranger (Freddie Prinze Jr.) who turns out to live in the building across the way, his apartment positioned just so Amanda can see in his windows any time she wants. At first she thinks he's a dreamboat, then Amanda remembers her awful luck with guys and looks for a flaw. He turns out to really be a dreamboat, then Amanda sees him beat some girl to death with a baseball bat. Her horror at that lasts less than 10 minutes and she's back mooning over him, only to eventually discover he has a big secret, just not any one she suspected.
The bottom line on Head Over Heels is that it's badly written in exactly the way you'd expect when 5 or 6 chaps each stick their paws into a romantic-comedy stew. Here's a good example of what I mean. Amanda spends virtually all of the film in the company of the 4 models. They are her support system, her humorous foils and plot devices upon which a lot of the movie depends. Except, when Amanda is introduced to the audience she already has a best friend at her art restoration job, a friend which is then dispensed with so Amanda and the models can team up. Her original best friend is absent for at least 90% of the film and brought back at the end for a couple of jokes. So, why was the original best friend kept in the script? It's the same reason why the story shifts through three different genres. With so many separate creative voices, especially male ones, a single narrative vision could never emerge.
Monica Potter is adorable, Freddie Prinze Jr. is generically handsome and Head Over Heels at least makes consistent attempts at being funny. A lot of those attempts are old hat and some are oddly crude, but a few laughs make it through. Yes, the characters are all morons and you don't actually care what happens to them. Reasonably appealing stars and an honest effort to entertain can sometimes be enough, however, and that might have been true here. The tripartite fiasco of the plot is what ultimately dooms this motion picture.
This isn't as annoying as most bad rom-coms. That's not enough to make it worth anyone's time.
You can forgive the conceit that Monica Potter is playing an average woman who moves in with 4 fashion models. I mean, this is Hollywood so a standout beauty like Potter is as close to average as their tiny brains can come. You can even forgive the models being played as the sympathetic cheering section for Potter's character, even though they're portrayed as stupid, shallow and materialistic. Though inappropriate for their role, that's far more personality than "best friend" characters usually get in rom-coms. What you can't forgive is how Head Over Heels is clearly broken up into three sections that are practically different genres.
It starts out with 30 minutes that includes almost every rom-com cliché, including the woman walking in on her cheating boyfriend, a makeover musical montage and a romantic misunderstanding. That segues into a half hour parody of "women in peril" flicks, though somewhat in reverse. Here, the woman sees the guy kill someone and then falls in love with him. Everything wraps up with 30 minutes of action-comedy involving international smuggling, fisticuffs at a fashion show and a cunnilingus sight gag. Not a brief one, either. The bit goes on for the better part of 30 seconds in a PG-13 film. That must have been a proud day for the motion picture ratings board.
Amanda (Monica Potter) is an art restorer with terrible judgment about men. When she catches her latest boyfriend cheating on her, she needs a new place to stay and gets taken in by 4 models (Shalom Harlow, Ivana Milicevic, Sarah O'Hare and Tomiko Fraser). Amanda is weak kneed at the sight of a handsome stranger (Freddie Prinze Jr.) who turns out to live in the building across the way, his apartment positioned just so Amanda can see in his windows any time she wants. At first she thinks he's a dreamboat, then Amanda remembers her awful luck with guys and looks for a flaw. He turns out to really be a dreamboat, then Amanda sees him beat some girl to death with a baseball bat. Her horror at that lasts less than 10 minutes and she's back mooning over him, only to eventually discover he has a big secret, just not any one she suspected.
The bottom line on Head Over Heels is that it's badly written in exactly the way you'd expect when 5 or 6 chaps each stick their paws into a romantic-comedy stew. Here's a good example of what I mean. Amanda spends virtually all of the film in the company of the 4 models. They are her support system, her humorous foils and plot devices upon which a lot of the movie depends. Except, when Amanda is introduced to the audience she already has a best friend at her art restoration job, a friend which is then dispensed with so Amanda and the models can team up. Her original best friend is absent for at least 90% of the film and brought back at the end for a couple of jokes. So, why was the original best friend kept in the script? It's the same reason why the story shifts through three different genres. With so many separate creative voices, especially male ones, a single narrative vision could never emerge.
Monica Potter is adorable, Freddie Prinze Jr. is generically handsome and Head Over Heels at least makes consistent attempts at being funny. A lot of those attempts are old hat and some are oddly crude, but a few laughs make it through. Yes, the characters are all morons and you don't actually care what happens to them. Reasonably appealing stars and an honest effort to entertain can sometimes be enough, however, and that might have been true here. The tripartite fiasco of the plot is what ultimately dooms this motion picture.
This isn't as annoying as most bad rom-coms. That's not enough to make it worth anyone's time.