Let me come right to the point: both are good, but in different ways.
The comparison is inevitable, and if you really think about it, there are more differences than similarities, contrary to popular belief. The most obvious difference is the time frame: "Valentine" happens within half a day, from morning to midnight on one February 14 while "Love" happens over a period of time. That underscores a more substantial difference, despite the fact that both are a collection of love stories. "Love" is segmented, not the least because the connection between the various protagonists is very loose, almost haphazard. Watching it feels like watching "Paris je t'aime" or "New York, I love you". While you can argue that the same thing can be said about "Valentine", the protagonists are more closely connected. You get a feeling of watching a coherent story where the parts do add up to a whole. The near-real-time structure is one reason. The other is that there is a central theme. While Christmas does not necessarily always spell LOVE, Valentine has to, invariably.
There's more. The half-dozen main stories in "Love" are balanced in terms of the weight they carry. With "Valentine", the main story has to be Jennifer Garner and Ashton Kutcher. A close second would be Anne Hathaway and Topher Grace. A slightly distant third is Jessica Biel and Jamie Foxx. Surrounding these is an assortment of minor stories, the more prominent of which comprises one senior couple (Hector Elizondo and an inimitable Shirley MacLaine) and two junior couples (Emma Roberts with Carter Jenkins; Taylor Swift with heartthrob werewolf Taylor Lautner). There is also the kid with a mysterious crush (absolutely adorable Bryce Robinson) and a gay couple that has only one scene of about 5 seconds together (Eric Dane and Bradley Cooper). Julia Roberts and Jessica Alba, I am happy to report, are a little more than cameos (though not much more) while Kathy Bates, Queen Latifah and Patrick Dempsey are just that.
I wouldn't go into the details of all the stories. Suffices to say that you'll find just about everything you expect to find in a movie of this sort. It's more meaningful to reiterate that this movie is well made and capably acted. There are plenty of good laughs and some tender moments. Dialogues are well written. During the establishing scenes, you get to hear just about every love song since the fifties (well, slight exaggeration). There is also good effort in giving visual pleasure (as if the collection of some of the best looking faces on screen is not enough). For example, early in the movie, there is a long, panning take that goes through two doors, makes a couple of 90 degree turns covering a variety of objects – not quite in the league of "Russian Ark", nevertheless quite well done.
The comparison is inevitable, and if you really think about it, there are more differences than similarities, contrary to popular belief. The most obvious difference is the time frame: "Valentine" happens within half a day, from morning to midnight on one February 14 while "Love" happens over a period of time. That underscores a more substantial difference, despite the fact that both are a collection of love stories. "Love" is segmented, not the least because the connection between the various protagonists is very loose, almost haphazard. Watching it feels like watching "Paris je t'aime" or "New York, I love you". While you can argue that the same thing can be said about "Valentine", the protagonists are more closely connected. You get a feeling of watching a coherent story where the parts do add up to a whole. The near-real-time structure is one reason. The other is that there is a central theme. While Christmas does not necessarily always spell LOVE, Valentine has to, invariably.
There's more. The half-dozen main stories in "Love" are balanced in terms of the weight they carry. With "Valentine", the main story has to be Jennifer Garner and Ashton Kutcher. A close second would be Anne Hathaway and Topher Grace. A slightly distant third is Jessica Biel and Jamie Foxx. Surrounding these is an assortment of minor stories, the more prominent of which comprises one senior couple (Hector Elizondo and an inimitable Shirley MacLaine) and two junior couples (Emma Roberts with Carter Jenkins; Taylor Swift with heartthrob werewolf Taylor Lautner). There is also the kid with a mysterious crush (absolutely adorable Bryce Robinson) and a gay couple that has only one scene of about 5 seconds together (Eric Dane and Bradley Cooper). Julia Roberts and Jessica Alba, I am happy to report, are a little more than cameos (though not much more) while Kathy Bates, Queen Latifah and Patrick Dempsey are just that.
I wouldn't go into the details of all the stories. Suffices to say that you'll find just about everything you expect to find in a movie of this sort. It's more meaningful to reiterate that this movie is well made and capably acted. There are plenty of good laughs and some tender moments. Dialogues are well written. During the establishing scenes, you get to hear just about every love song since the fifties (well, slight exaggeration). There is also good effort in giving visual pleasure (as if the collection of some of the best looking faces on screen is not enough). For example, early in the movie, there is a long, panning take that goes through two doors, makes a couple of 90 degree turns covering a variety of objects – not quite in the league of "Russian Ark", nevertheless quite well done.