3. Wimbledon (2008)
Written by Adam Brooks, Jennifer Flackett and Mark Levin
Directed by Richard LoncraineI should preface this by stating that tennis is, by far, my absolute favorite sport in the world to watch and to participate in. A constant source of annoyance and bafflement to tennis fans is the fact that, to this date, there has never been a truly great tennis film that really captures the game in an evocative, passionate way. Tennis doesn't have a Bull Durham or a Hoosiers. In fact, the best tennis films that I've seen have been produced for television (the fun Billie Jean King/Battle of the Sexes biopic
When Billie Beat Bobby with Holly Hunter and Ron Silver and the ESPN 30 for 30 doc about Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova). Everything else has been mediocre or just plain bad.
When
Wimbledon was about to come out, a lot of tennis fans sort of held their breath. It had a decent budget, two notable stars in Paul Bettany (fresh off an excellent turn in
Master and Commander) and Kirsten Dunst (fresh off of not detracting from
Spiderman 2 and
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) and a fun-looking trailer. So when it came out and was a fairly weak film, we fans weren't surprised but very disappointed. But hope springs eternal. This is the third time I've seen this film and I always hope that I'll catch something I missed before or find something to latch on to that will make the experience enjoyable. This time I thought that maybe in the context of this marathon, I would enjoy the experience more. I'd say for the third time, I've struck out on that (to mix sports metaphors) but I can at least say that this time I
hated it less than ever.
Wimbledon is the tale of a journeyman British tennis player (Paul Bettany) at the tail end of his career. He was once ranked in the top 20 but now he's a step slow, less powerful and being overtaken by younger talent. But filled with confidence after a tryst with a young American up-and-comer Lizzie Bradbury (Kirsten Dunst), he is filled with renewed confidence and finds himself in a position to be the first British man to win Wimbledon in decades. But Lizzie's father (Sam Neill, given almost nothing to do but frown) is unhappy with his daughter being distracted and seeks to put an end to their budding relationship.
I won't beat around the bush, Kirsten Dunst does not turn in a great performance. She doesn't imbue her character with any personality or charm. On the podcast, Matty sometimes references young actresses "playing at" something rather than being convincing. Dunst here always seems to be "playing at" being a free-spirit with attitude. But she's utterly unconvincing. On the court, she simply seems to be doing a John McEnroe impression (the easiest impression in tennis history, for the record). I couldn't help but mentally compare it to Tom Hulce's transcendent performance in Amadeus. Hulce has said that much of his inspiration for that performance came from John McEnroe's behavior. Anyway, that's just a random musing about an actor channeling someone and Dunst doing a very simple imitation.
Bettany does the best he can to make the romance between the two engaging, but that is probably the weakest part of the film. It's a romantic comedy without a convincing romance. The two Meet Cute, have sex, and all of a sudden they're in love. All of the spark, charm and chemistry has been omitted.
This film also tries to be accessible to both tennis fans and tennis outsiders, succeeding in appeasing no one. There are a bunch of nice touches that only tennis viewers would appreciate (the well-placed cameos by John Barrett and Mary Carrillo, for example) but then there are simple details that make a tennis fan want to put their foot through the screen (confusing "games" with "sets," forgetting that Wimbledon has 7 rounds, not 6, etc.) The kicker is the commentary. Mcenroe and Chris Evert make cameos as TV commentators for the final match and their play-by-play is so idiotic and oversimplified that i can't believe those two excellent real-life commentators agreed to read the lines.
Okay, rant over.
The film does have some nice touches. The screenplay is often very fun and very funny. Paul Bettany and James McAvoy (playing Bettany's brother) have some very clever lines and moments with each other. In fact, I wish the film would have been about Bettany's relationship with his dysfunctional family, rather than with Kirsten Dunst. The family is typically only utilized for simple comic relief but their scenes work while the ones with Dunst don't. Bettany's inner monologue during his matches also rings very true. Voiceover, more often than not, isn't terribly effective, but in this film, the scenes where we hear Bettany's thoughts as he's losing or winning work for me because they seem to be written by someone who has a strong relationship with the game of tennis. I laughed out loud when Bettany was serving for a match and all he could think ad nauseum was "don't choke, don't choke, don't choke, please don't choke." Any tennis player can relate to that
exact moment.
But the film ultimately doesn't work. Dunst is simply a drag on the film and romance is completely dead on arrival. The plot itself is formulaic to a fault and it doesn't build any tension. There is not a single surprising or original thing here cinematically or plot-wise. It's a bit of a missed opportunity. With a different focus and a stronger, more dedicated lead actress it could have been something worth seeing a fourth time.
2.5 out of 5.0