MovieChat Forums > Morning Glory (2010) Discussion > Seriously guys? This movie is terrible.

Seriously guys? This movie is terrible.


I'm failing to see how anyone enjoyed this movie. It was almost painful for me to watch. What gives with all the people saying it's hilarious, smart, refreshing, etc? To me, it was exactly like every other movie of its genre but even less funny than normal. Some issues I had with it:

*Some major spoilers ahead, don't read if you don't want the movie to be spoiled for you*

*I'm more than happy to spend an evening watching a pleasant romantic comedy. But the romance in this movie is so weak! The awkward flirting was cute and showed promise but the second they went on the date I considered myself totally un-invested. The hot blonde coming up and saying "You never called..." causing McAdams' character to run out was never brought up again, nothing to the effect of "hmm should I be worried that your the type who sleeps with bimbos then never calls them?". I kept waiting for the issue to re-surface in the movie and it never did. Then they insert a random scene with McAdam's character babbling incessantly about why they can't be together and it doesn't even make sense! It was clearly stuck in the movie randomly to add some sort of drama to the relationship...and hey, it goes no where anyway!


*The characters of Diane Keaton and Harrsion Ford. Were so. Boring. Incredibly boring. Harrison Ford seems incapable of moving his face. He had literally no redeeming qualities; he was a snobbish diva from the beginning to the end of the movie and then suddenly he decides he cares so much about the (very recently hired) executive producer he's going to drop all of these horrible traits about himself..in the lamest way possible. It could have been done much, much better than it was. And Diane Keaton was under-used imo, her character could have been developed much further. The two of them getting together in the end was, of course, predictable but was done in the sloppiest way possible...no feelings of fondness are shown between them AT ALL.

*The message of this movie is disturbing. Rachel McAdam's character says to Harrison Ford's "Entertainment and News have been battling it out for years and your side lost" (something to that effect). The only way for the TV show to stay on the air is to pull a bunch of stunts completely unrelated to what's actually going on in the world. It's certainly realistic but in the movie it's portrayed as a good thing, rather than a damn tragedy. Which it is.

*The climax. Rachel McAdam's decision to stay at her old TV show rather than move to NBC was so completely, mind-blowingly stupid. She stays because it "feels like a family", Harrison Ford makes eggs at the end and, uh.....? The family thing was not sufficiently portrayed in the movie, I had no idea they were supposed to all be so damn close until she said that line. Her pay was crap, the show was crap,her boss was a dick, she wasn't doing anything worthwhile with her time, the leads in the show treated her like crap. Am I missing something? I'm fairly certain that the minute Ford's contract was up he would have left the show promptly, making her act of loyalty totally pointless.

Thanks for taking the time to read all of that, if you did. Did anyone else hate this movie?


For British eyes only

reply

The problem with your major complaint is that the heroine's romance is not with the guy, but with her job. It's in the same sub-genre as The Devil Wears Prada. Did you consider that a romantic comedy? The guy role in Morning Glory is like the supportive girlfriend role in other movies where the guy plays the work-obsessed, success-driven character that McAdams plays in Morning Glory.

I mean, do you see the guy in any of the posters? No, you see the two pains in the ass that she works with. How can anyone think this is a traditional romantic comedy when there's no age-appropriate guy in the poster? What romantic comedy poster have you ever seen that doesn't have the guy in it?

"The family thing was not sufficiently portrayed in the movie, I had no idea they were supposed to all be so damn close until she said that line. "

Well, you did have to notice how Becky and her assistant got along so well together; how supportive and encouraging he was even though he was an older guy and she, a young woman, was his boss. How the weatherman was willing to do all sorts of hair-raising stunts to save the show. And how close she and Mike had become. Mike's capitulation (making the frittata) was his way of saying, "I love you." There's no way he could've been her love interest in a physical sense, but he was in every other way.


"The only way for the TV show to stay on the air is to pull a bunch of stunts completely unrelated to what's actually going on in the world. It's certainly realistic but in the movie it's portrayed as a good thing, rather than a damn tragedy. Which it is."

I don't think it was portrayed as a good thing--more of a that's the way it is thing. People want stunts, and if you want to get the ratings and if you want to stay on the air you have to be willing to lighten up and sneak the serious stuff in whenever you can.

I do agree with you about one thing, though. There was no chemistry between Keaton and Ford. Her role should have been played by a younger actress. Michelle Pfeiffer. Someone you could believe was once Miss Arizona. It would have added another dimension to their bickering--sexual tension-- which would have made their relationship more interesting.

reply

I loved the movie, and think if you took the time to notice the subtlties, changes to both anchors characters, the relationship with Becky and her associate producer and the way Ford's character changes (i.e. the frittata scene) your stone cold heart (lol) would have been warmed by this movie. IMO. I agree fully with tyler, who summed it up very well.

reply

The weatherman didn't do all those stunts to save the show. She didn't tell anyone until the very end that they were in danger of being cancelled.

reply

Speaking of The Devil Wears Prada, THAT is a great "career love story" type of movie. Loved it!

Call me Katie. ;-)

reply

You clearly saw the movie I did. Patrick Wilson's character served no purpose. The only thing I liked was Diane Keaton's character. I would rather have just watched her character for two hours. And I completely agree with you about the end. The only that would have maybe worked if the movie had a silly behind the scenes at a network morning show movie that was not trying to be dramatic and "realistic". I really wanted to like this movie. The trailer made it look like it was going to be quite funny. But it felt like it didn't know what it wanted to be. I am as mystified as you. I guess maybe everyone else was shown a different movie.

The Roundhay Garden Scene
Adventures in Cinema
http://theroundhaygardenscene.blogspot.com/

reply

The movie would have been much better had the Patrick Wilson character been cut.

reply

Wow, your grammar is atrocious.

I'm happiest...in the saddle.

reply

michaelflatley, your post isn't easy to read, but it's worth the effort. Bravo!

reply

I'm certainly not a "heartless biatch". I just don't think it makes sense for an ambitious, intelligent person to turn down a job that would have been not only better in pay but has been her dream her whole life to work for a failing show. I think it's a weak story that could have been done better if the movie had been better.

For British eyes only

reply

She did what she did; you'd do what you'd do. You wanted to see a different movie--one in which the main character is Regina George. So go write it.

And who said, having turned around a show that was about to be cancelled, she wouldn't get a massive raise from the network she's with? And who said that turning down the job at NBC wouldn't make them want her even more? And who said that a year later, when she's a big 29 years old and the two anchors are ready to retire that she isn't snapped up by NBC? Or given the opportunity to create another morning show (if that's what turns her on). If you prove yourself in the trenches, the skies the limit. And little Becky (or McKenna) is smart enough to know that.

reply

[deleted]

And we miss him in L.A. and want him back.

reply

And we miss him in L.A. and want him back.


Speak for yourself.

reply

This ass hole is trying to act black. Gimme a fkn break.

reply

Good GOD, how far did you go in school? Dropped out in the first grade? I can see using shortcuts if you're texting and have to pay for each word, but your grammar is just horrific!

reply

good grammar = mo werdz = mo bytez = $$$

I live, I love, I slay, and I'm content

reply

[deleted]

I am very much like McAdams' character in this movie. A workaholic that revolves his life around his career. I am glad that she didn't take the Today Show gig but I have a different view of the whole thing.

We are goal-setters. While the Today show is her ambition, she hasn't finished with what she started at DayBreak. It would be like giving up or not succeeding to move on to something else before making sure that she had given everything she could to DayBreak. She'd only been there for a few months. I personally think she grew a LOT in her position at DayBreak and that she had a lot of growing left to do before persuing a larger career at a bigger network -- she would have been underqualified I think.

So, like many of you, I also disagree with the whole "we're a family so I'm staying with the crappy pay for that and saying no to the big corporate *beep* bit. I'm sure the Today show is a family AS WELL. I just think her character should have stayed for the professional reasons I listed rather than the standard, "being devoted to your job is bad" message that movies are promoting.

Dyslexics are teople poo

reply

I love this.

She also couldn't stop watching the TV during her NBC interview--so she was still invested in its outcomes. And it didn't seem like it would be a good cultural fit for her; she doesn't know much about sports, for example. She definitely had things to finish at DayBreak.

"I am not worried, Harry...I am with you."

reply

To get to the point where she was with the network at that point and see how it was coming together, it's very easy to see why she stayed.

She wasn't in it for the money at that point, she was in it because of the sweat equity she put into it and saw that it was going to work and that was worth more than the opportunity with the Today show.

It's not always about the money, its about the challenge that comes with the job that drives a lot of people like her character. I've had jobs that I loved that were nothing but frustrating at times, but I could see things getting better and knowing it I had a part in that was worth far more than the money.

Anyone can take a cushy job and not deal with any challenges, frustrations or struggles but what do you really get from that except money and boredom.

Give me the trenches and headaches because then I know I made a difference and grew in my career

reply

To get to the point where she was with the network at that point and see how it was coming together, it's very easy to see why she stayed.

She wasn't in it for the money at that point, she was in it because of the sweat equity she put into it and saw that it was going to work and that was worth more than the opportunity with the Today show.

It's not always about the money, its about the challenge that comes with the job that drives a lot of people like her character. I've had jobs that I loved that were nothing but frustrating at times, but I could see things getting better and knowing it I had a part in that was worth far more than the money.

Anyone can take a cushy job and not deal with any challenges, frustrations or struggles but what do you really get from that except money and boredom.

Give me the trenches and headaches because then I know I made a difference and grew in my career

reply

[deleted]

Sometimes the feeling of hard-won satisfaction at a job can be worth more than the glitz and glory and money that comes from another. And sometimes, in the pursuit of a dream, in the pursuit of the thing that you have thought would fulfill you if only you could obtain it, you get a wake-up call and learn what you have is worth holding onto and that trading up doesn't always mean you're trading up for something better.

The Today Show was her dream forever but in the pursuit of that goal, she discovered that the work she was doing for Daybreak was more challenging and gratifying because the effort and the results meant more. She was making her mark. She was turning around a show that everyone had written off....even its own staff....and made the staff and the network believe in them again. Pretty damn powerful stuff.

Sometimes the money isn't worth what you'd be giving up at your current job or in your life outside of work. Money definitely cannot buy happiness and happiness, wherever and whenever you find it, is not something to be ignored or thrown away.

reply

[deleted]

I guess I'll respond to your spoilers because I liked this movie.

* She does respond to their awkward "first" date in the "charade scene" (which I found extremely funny).
She was intimidated by his university reputation as a "rower" and that he could blow off tall blond chicks with big "melons"??? That scene is long before her rambling exit scene. Apparently, you had an issue with her career/love life conflict.

* Harrison's "Mike Pomeroy" is anything but boring. He's definitely a man with issues and is at war with
those issues (news vs. fluff, failure, family, alcohol to name a few) Becky Fuller sees his potential and he
"changes" because she pushes him to change, He gains a grudging respect for her and in the end, is
willing to make a "fluffy" egg dish to win her back to IBS (a hilarious network acronym). Diane Keaton
was great in a limited role. I'm not sure how more developed you wanted her character to be? She is a
wonderful actress and she was "spot on" as a beauty queen diva who provides some great scenes with
Harrison and Rachel.

* Remember this is a Morning Show. As sad as reality may be, Rachel's Becky was right. Her job was to
keep the show from being cancelled. She succeeded. Since the 80s (maybe even the 70s) that's been road we have traveled.

*As Forrest Gump once said, "Stupid is what stupid does..." When Becky was first fired from her New Jersey morning show she was looking for someone to take a chance on her. Jeff Goldblum's boss character reluctantly hires her. From the time she fired the male co-host MOST of the production staff was in her corner. As previously mentioned, she eventually got the co-hosts do things HER way (Heck, Diane's character even volunteered to be a team player). Even her boss (upstairs gesture) got his gal pal to read the dictionary and was visibly shaken by BF's impending departure. It's 'stupid" if her motivation was money and position ( there's only one way to go when you're #1!!!) but for some people loyalty and
personal relationships have some bearing. In the end we must realize, it's ONLY A MOVIE!!!

I liked the movie so much that I've already seen it twice. Did I say I was a HUGE McAdams fan???
I hope this helped with some of your 'problems" with the movie.

reply

[deleted]

Excuse me? That is incredibly uncalled for. I disagree with you about a movie and you are insulting my intelligence. I CERTAINLY "got" this movie and I DIDNT LIKE IT. It's not unheard of. Get off your damn high horse.

For British eyes only

reply

I guess I didn't get it either. I found it very funny but definitely not poignant.

reply

[deleted]

I didn't think I was going to see a lame romcom. I thought I was going to see a witty take on breakfast television shows.

Instead I got an excruciatingly irritating main character, Becky, who couldn't be more perky if she was on drugs. The film improved dramatically when she SHUT UP!! Sadly, she was on screen most of the time.

I got Harrison Ford, who growled his way through the film so that I could hardly make out what he was saying.

I got Diane Keaton, who acted manically as though she was trying to survive this disaster.

I got Becky's romantic love interest, who had the personality of a plank of wood.

The director is the one who didn't get it - the whole tone is wrong. The entire cinema audience was bored when I saw it.

A woeful, terrible, waste of my time. Yuck.

reply

^ This. All of it. Except the last line. I had enough chuckles throughout the movie to keep me from labeling it a complete waste of time.

You saw Dingleberries?

reply