Funny About Love (1990) BOMB (out of 4)Duffy Bergman (Gene Wilder) is a cartoonist who has pretty much lived his life alone just the way he likes it. This all changes when he meets Meg (Christine Lahti) and quickly falls in love. The two are married and plan on having a kid but that proves to be complicated, which leads to a series of dramatic events.FUNNY ABOUT LOVE is a film that I've heard a lot about and none of it was good. It wasn't a success at the box office, it had some pre-release editing done to it and it ended up on most critic's worst of the year list. No matter what you read about this film there's really nothing that can prepare you for how truly awful it is. This film was directed by Leonard Nimoy and it features a terrific cast but everything just goes horrendously wrong and in the end its clearly one of the worst films of the decade if not one of the worst comedies of all time.The film apparently had an entire subplot that was cut out of the film, which had Farrah Fawcett as a love interest. It's pretty clear to see that something is missing from the film as the entire movie just feels like bits and pieces are missing. The movie will be going in one direction and the next thing you know something complete different is going on. I was a little confused at what the movie was trying to do, trying to say and I was wondering if the filmmakers knew what was going on.The film starts off as a romantic comedy and then out of nowhere we get some of the most out-of-touch drama I've ever seen. Just take a look at an early sequence where Wilder's mother attacks the couple for not having children. Throughout the film there are strange bits of dialogue, a really bizarre subplot dealing with Wilder and a much younger woman (Mary Stuart Masterson) and then there's the ending, which is just downright embarrassing. The entire movie was just so poorly made and so poorly written that you couldn't help but feel a bit depressed watching it.Normally Wilder could make just about anything work but that's not the case here. He's all over the map and it's clear he didn't get too much direction. Lahti tries to do what she can but her character isn't given any favors. Out of the cast it would be Mary Stuart Masterson who comes off the best but that's not saying too much. Robert Prosky, Susan Ruttan and David Margulies are all wasted in their parts. It makes you wonder what Fawcett would have done in the film.FUNNY ABOUT LOVE is a romantic comedy that has no laugh and certainly no romance. I really don't know what went so horribly wrong with this movie but it's certainly a misfire from the word go.

While certainly not one of anyone's favorite comedies, there is an amount of sweetness to this film. Gene Wilder is an "edgy" cartoon strip writer - though as the viewer you're rolling your eyes as a conservative or a liberal - that becomes very desirous of having a baby with his new wife, Christine Lahti. When things don't biologically work out, they break up and Wilder finds himself in a relationship with Mary Stuart Masterson. Eventually, that doesn't work out either and Wilder realizes that Lahti means more to him as a wife than what a baby can bring to their relationship. End of story. The cons are evident in the film - simplistic story, no real depth of any character, no "laugh out loud" scene, no dewy-eyed scene. The script is mundane, the humor is flat. The best you'll get is a smile. The pros are few, but speak volumes to the main three actors. Firstly, Wilder is pitch perfect as usual - completely at ease in his character. Lahti gives a fine performance, elegant and sweet. Masterson - such a beautiful and amazingly talented actress - is wonderful in her strong-willed yet completely vulnerable character. Finally, Nimoy must be given credit for the pacing of the movie by keeping the scenes quick and fun. While the movie is long on relationships, it is short on character and development thereof. The easy-come-easy-go of the Wilder/Lahti, Wilder/Masterson relationships simply demand the viewer to not only accept but understand. While the viewer can certainly understand the situations, the viewer never sees the nuts and bolts that drive them. For me, this was the most frustrating part of the film. Overall, not great, but not bad, either - light and airy.

and I used to live on the Upper West Side of NY and work in Brooklyn. Each workday I would take the subway from Central Park West to Brooklyn. On the morning of March 26, 1989, I happened to see a film crew working in the park as I approached the train station. I asked a crew man, "What project are you working on?" He answered, "New York Times"--which was the working title for the movie. The newspaper would not give the studio permission to use that title so it was changed. I knew about the working title from Trekzine. I asked the man to please wish Mr. Nimoy a happy birthday! I've always wondered if he did . . . and if Mr. Nimoy wondered how a passerby knew (a) that it happened to be his birthday and (b) that he was the director of the movie in production! Since Mr. Wilder plays a cartoonist in the film I suggested the title "See You in the Funny Pages" but, of course, it wasn't used. I've seen the movie and tried to spot a scene filmed at Central Park but I didn't see it.

This movie is TERRIBLE. I like Gene Wilder but I have no idea what was going through his head when he decided to do this flick. The only mildly funny moment is when he describes how his mother was killed. He says she was crushed by a piano falling out of a building ala Wile Coyote. One of the worst movies i ever paid to see.