Review: The Lake House (2006)

THE LAKE HOUSE
(a film review by Mark R. Leeper)

CAPSULE: A man from 2004 and a woman from 2006 are
in mail communication through a magic mailbox
outside the same house that each is living in his
or her respective year. It could be a good idea,
but the fantasy is leaden and refuses to play by
the rules it itself set up. So it is not very good
as a fantasy and it really does not work as a
romance. Alejandro Agresti directs a screenplay by
David Auburn based on the Korean film SIWORAE
(IL MARE). Rating: +0 (-4 to +4) or 4/10

In vampire films there are certain rules defining a vampire's
powers and limitations. They can vary from one vampire story to
the next, but within a single story the rules must be logical and
consistent. Rules are very important in a fantasy film. A world
in which just about anything can happen is a world in which
nothing that happens much matters. It is hard to have much of an
emotional investment in such a fantasy world. It has been noted
that fantasy has to make more sense than the real world does. In
writing a fantasy story the writer has to know at the beginning
what the rules are of this world. It is evident that that was
not done with THE LAKE HOUSE and the film suffers badly as a
result.

Sandra Bullock plays Chicago doctor Kate Forster who is moving
out of the title house in 2006 and leaves mail for the next
tenant in the mailbox. (Ironically, no postman ever seems to
come near this mailbox in the whole course of the film.) Keanu
Reeves plays Alex Wyler, a successful architect who is moving
into the house and finds the note. The strange thing is that he
is moving in 2004. The mailbox seems to be a sort of time
portal. He is at first confused because he knows there had been
no previous tenant. In addition, his mail seems to be coming
from someone who does not know the correct date. After they meet
cute (but weird) they come to be attracted to each other through
their correspondence, but can they actually meet? There is a
side question of whether Alex can reconcile with his cold and
distant father, a world-famous architect.

My problem with the script is that even if you accept the premise
much of what you see does not make sense. They seem to have
conversations "in real time." Kate and Alex seem to have rapid
back and forth conversations, in one case during a tour of
Chicago architecture. Much of the tension comes from the
question of whether the two can find each other in spite of the
two-year delay. It is hard to believe that in this age of easy
information a successful doctor cannot find out about a
successful architect from the same city. Alex also never seems
to realize the possibilities and value of getting information
from two years in the future. Kate never tells him about the
Indian Ocean Tsunami, for example. Nor does she mention
Hurricane Katrina. It is a little hard to believe she would not
mention events that important. Even as a doctor pledged to same
lives she just says dreamily that the world has not changed much
in those two years, but of course it had. Having her so
disinterested makes her sound very self-absorbed.

Other little things bothered me about the plot. Probably no
restaurant would take a reservation two years in advance. The
plot has a lot of coincidence and frequently telegraphs upcoming
surprises. The screenplay is by David Auburn, the Pulitzer
Prize-winning playwright of PROOF (and who my family assures me
is a remote cousin of mine).

This film is being called a reunion of Keanu Reeves and Sandra
Bullock who co-starred in SPEED. Given that they have only a few
scenes together they do not have much time for screen chemistry.
Even when they are together Reeves seems a little remote.
Shohreh Aghdashloo, best known for her Oscar-nominated role in
THE HOUSE OF SAND AND FOG, is notable as a co-worker of Kate's.

THE LAKE HOUSE is nice and soft and romantic but has no logic or
even intelligence whatsoever. I rate it a 0 on the -4 to +4
scale or 4/10.

Two more minor complaints: Hollywood scriptwriters seem to know
about only a handful of professions. Here the main characters
are an architect and a doctor. Movies have lots of doctors and
quite a few architects. How about an asphalt layer or an
airplane baggage handler? Most professions never show up in
films.

Also Kate lives at 1620 Racine. Why are so many film addresses
16-something? In one week I saw three addresses that were in
some 1600 block. Sean Connery in the UNTOUCHABLES lived at 1634
Racine, just a few doors down from where Kate would supposedly
live.

Mark R. Leeper
mleeper RemoveThis @optonline.net
Copyright 2006 Mark R. Leeper