"Morning Glory" (2010) is a romantic comedy about the frantic world of morning television. When TV producer Becky Fuller (Rachel McAdams) is fired from a local news program, her career seems to reach a desperate point. A job at "Daybreak", the last-place national morning news show, becomes the turning point and she commits to bringing it back from the dead. In order to do that, Becky decides to recruit, by force, Mike Pomeroy (Harrison Ford), a legendary TV anchor who considers himself too important to cover shallow morning news, filled with celebrity gossip, cooking ideas and DIY segments.
Back then, when the movie was released, The Guardian called it a "disappointing TV-studio-set romantic comedy" where "nothing about the chemistry works" and the NY Times defined it as "passably amusing". I don't really understand why the movie was so poorly accepted back then. Sure, it fits perfectly into that romantic movie/sitcom template that we all have seen 1000 times (and yes, there's the "running for you because now I understand" scene in the end), but the difference remains with the set of actors. Keaton, Ford and McAdams show a perfect chemistry while delivering a funny, unpretentious script filled with amusing moments and hilarious sarcasms regarding the world of morning TV.
Rachel McAdams is flawless, linking everything together with a true, great performance of a passionate, rather caffeinated, TV producer constantly over the edge. Diane Keaton was born to play this confident/control freak woman (a character in which she's been strongly typecast) and Ford is perfect doing this self-centered, grumpy, old-school journalist who doesn't say the word "fluffy".
In the current world of romantic comedies that delivers poor snooze fests like "27 dresses" (2008) or "You, Me and Dupree" (2006), "Morning Glory" (2010) seems to reach its goal with a strong cast and a funny script. It really is just that: a fun, witty movie. And that's OK.
Back then, when the movie was released, The Guardian called it a "disappointing TV-studio-set romantic comedy" where "nothing about the chemistry works" and the NY Times defined it as "passably amusing". I don't really understand why the movie was so poorly accepted back then. Sure, it fits perfectly into that romantic movie/sitcom template that we all have seen 1000 times (and yes, there's the "running for you because now I understand" scene in the end), but the difference remains with the set of actors. Keaton, Ford and McAdams show a perfect chemistry while delivering a funny, unpretentious script filled with amusing moments and hilarious sarcasms regarding the world of morning TV.
Rachel McAdams is flawless, linking everything together with a true, great performance of a passionate, rather caffeinated, TV producer constantly over the edge. Diane Keaton was born to play this confident/control freak woman (a character in which she's been strongly typecast) and Ford is perfect doing this self-centered, grumpy, old-school journalist who doesn't say the word "fluffy".
In the current world of romantic comedies that delivers poor snooze fests like "27 dresses" (2008) or "You, Me and Dupree" (2006), "Morning Glory" (2010) seems to reach its goal with a strong cast and a funny script. It really is just that: a fun, witty movie. And that's OK.