# Married to It (1991)

### reviewed by
James Berardinelli

                                      MARRIED TO IT
                           A film review by James Berardinelli
                            Copyright 1993 James Berardinelli

    Date Released:  3/26/93
    Running Length:  1:52
    Rated:  R (Language, sexual situations)

    Starring:  Mary Stuart Masterson, Robert Sean Leonard, Beau Bridges,
               Stockard Channing, Cybill Shepherd, Ron Silver
    Director:  Arthur Hiller
    Producer:  Thomas Baer
    Screenplay:  Janet Kovalcik
    Music:  Henry Mancini
    Released by Orion Pictures

Three couples, all having marriage problems, meet and become friends. There's Nina (Mary Stuart Masterson) and Chuck (Robert Sean Leonard), a young couple who have just moved into an apartment in New York. She's a school psychologist and he's an investment banker who has run afoul of the law. Then there's John (Beau Bridges) and Iris (Stockard Channing), who have been married for years and have two children. Products of the sixties, both of them are having varying degrees of trouble coping with the changes in attitude that have occurred in the Eighties and Nineties. Finally, there's Claire (Cybill Shepherd) and Leo (Ron Silver), whose relationship works more on the physical than emotional level. Their marriage is troubled by Claire's inability to relate to Leo's young daughter.

MARRIED TO IT is an exercise in mediocrity. There is nothing exceptionally hateful or likable in this movie. This is one of those rare occasions when I came out of a film completely indifferent to what I just saw. If not for this review, I would have forgotten about it five minutes after the final credits rolled.

The plot is a series of contrivances lumped together then truncated with pat endings. There's nothing inventive or even slightly original here. Most of the "deep" subjects tackled by the film have been touched on more expertly and less cloyingly than in MARRIED TO IT. Superficially, in the way this movie tried to ties together the different lifestyles of its main characters, I was reminded of GRAND CANYON. Don't be fooled, though. This has none of the power of Lawrence Kasdan's 1991 film. I can't say it's an poor imitation, though, even though that's the impression that it gives. MARRIED TO IT was filmed back in 1990, before GRAND CANYON. Because of Orion's continuing financial problems, it has sat on the shelf until now. Its long-delayed and much-troubled release was definitely not worth the wait.

The comedy in the film is mostly lame. There are a few funny moments, but most of the jokes are real clunkers. The drama isn't more solid. MARRIED TO IT has no concept of what it takes to draw an audience into a film. Its sense of character is terrible. None of the six principles is particularly engaging, and every relationship in the movie is plagued by cliche after cliche. There is absolutely no chemistry going on, and if you can't care about the characters, what's the motivation to get involved?

There's a feeble attempt at social commentary in MARRIED TO IT. While the subject - the often-devastating effect of divorce on young children - is important, its handling is so inept that it ends up being a forgettable throw-in. Not helping matters is the offhand way in which this entire element of the plot is routinely dispatched.

Of the actors, Mary Stuart Masterson turns in the most feeling performance. Although clearly inferior to her work in FRIED GREEN TOMATOES (which was her next project after this one), she manages to infuse Nina with what can best be described as an "innocent toughness". Of the other principles, only Stockard Channing and Ron Silver do a remotely reasonable job. Robert Sean Leonard seems lost half the time, Beau Bridges sleepwalks through his part, and Cybill Shepherd, with a stilted performance, shows that she's apparently lost whatever talent she once possessed. There's no sign of THE LAST PICTURE SHOW's starlet in this movie.

Nothing in MARRIED TO IT is done well. There are problems with the script, the actors, and the direction. On the other hand, none of these deficiencies are so bad that they completely sink the project. They're unfortunate, but not awful, so instead of the movie being unwatchable, it's just not memorable. There's not much here for anyone to enjoy - or despise.

                                 Rating: 6.0 (C, **)

- James Berardinelli (blake7@cc.bellcore.com)

    .

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews