2 Days in New York
Back in the day, whenever I watched a film with Pip I ended up. It was the case with “Juno”, but I am surprised to see that it is apparently also the case with “2 Days in Paris”. I remember the film vividly and I could have sworn that I wrote at least a few lines or so about the meaningfulness of its last lines.
“2 Days in New York” is not just one of those cases where the sequel is worse. It’s way more than that – it’s a case where the sequel is practically destroying everything that was good in the first film. Just take aforementioned deeper meaning of the last lines. She basically makes a (seemingly wise) laudatio to relationships, and how in the end she realized that she truly wanted the relationship she had. Incidentally, “2 Days in New York” starts off with her impressively lame break-up from this carefully built up relationship, voiding everything she said in the previous film.
In the New York film, we get another one of these meaningful quotes, except now it’s all about sticking to your family. But there are some differences. While “Paris” showed that their relationship was somehow worth having, “New York” was all about how worthless her family is. So we get a 2 minute long dramatic scene in which her family tries to save her life – and that suddenly gets rid of all their problems? That was almost as bad as in the couple’s reconciliation in “Viaggio in Italia”. A simple emotional moment may make you forget about your deeper problems for a minute, but that doesn’t change them fundamentally.
The entire depiction of Marion’s family is so unfortunate because Chris Rock is playing a perfectly cool guy who has amusing imaginary conversations with Obama when he’s frustrated. His comparable levelheadedness provides much of the lightheartedness the film needs. Unlike Adam Goldberg’s cynical, negative character, Chris Rock’s character is a keeper and would have permitted a relationship based on true understanding – not just some spur of the moment get-together. Julie Delpy’s character never actually learns anything, and the film practically resolves in some emotional deus ex machine, very much unlike “Paris” where the conclusion of the film made sense.
At this point, it is probably needless to say that I didn’t think the film was funny. “Paris” was mostly based on misunderstandings and actual cultural differences, “New York” suddenly turned French people into irresponsible, childish jerks which, honestly, I don’t think has anything to do with culture. Perhaps French people do enjoy vulgar sex jokes more (I can actually get behind that cliché, although back in the day I thought Parisian college kids were simply more immature than us), but is smoking pot in the elevator, using other people’s toothbrushes without asking and fighting over breakfast croissants a cultural thing? I have never seen actual French people do any of that. Unfortunately, none of that is funny.
On a much more amusing side note, Daniel Brühl was in the film for like… 15 seconds? He didn’t even communicate with the characters or anything, he was just some random guy on TV (and happens to be the same guy who was in “2 Days in Paris” as well).
Sometimes I like to watch sequels just because I really liked the original film. In those situations my expectations are typically rather low and my verdict ends up being “ah, well of course I preferred the first one, but this one’s fine”. In this case, “2 Days in New York” is way below any low expectations I could have had. Please forget this film has ever happened. I pray that Ethan Hawke and Richard Linklater had enough positive influence on Julie Delpy to turn “Before Midnight” into a success.