No I do’s for ‘Four Weddings’ reboot
Kelly Lawler: Hulu series stumbles at the altar.
Stringing together four weddings and one funeral does not “Four Weddings and a Funeral” make.
That’s the original, cardinal sin behind Hulu’s new miniseries (streaming Wednesday, ★★☆☆) based on the 1994 romantic comedy classic. Hulu’s version, produced by rom-com obsessive Mindy Kaling, has the requisite nuptials and memorial but is otherwise hollow and clichéd, completely lacking the casting chemistry that made the Hugh Grant, Andie MacDowell and Kristin Scott Thomas original so indelibly essential to the canon.
It’s a shame, because “Four Weddings” brings together a truly talented group of young actors, including “Game of Thrones” alum Nathalie Emmanuel and “You’re the Worst” breakout Brandon Mychal Smith. The series follows a group of friends, most of whom are American expats living in London. Maya (Emmanuel) is a U.S.-based political operative sleeping with her married boss, who travels to the U.K. frequently to visit her expat friends and at one point, for the wedding of Ainsley (Rebecca Rittenhouse) and Kash (Nikesh Patel), although Kash, of course, has far more chemistry with Maya than with his intended.
Also hanging around are Craig (Smith), a finance bro who’s just found out he’s a father; his trashy British girlfriend Zara (Sophia La Porta); Duffy (John Reynolds), a teacher who’s long been in love with Maya; and Gemma (Zoe Boyle), a snooty friend of Ainsley’s who loathes Maya and only speaks in clichés.
Like the original film, there are four weddings, one funeral, someone gets left at the altar, there’s an affair, and a central, co-dependent group of friends in which one member is hopelessly and unrequitedly in love with another. But that’s mostly it. There are no direct character parallels, few wedding parallels and no re-written or recreated scenes. Easter eggs are sprinkled throughout (for instance, the series and the film share the same opening line), but the tone, plot and characters are so radically different from the film that it’s
a wonder they share a name, other than a nostalgia ploy to lure unsuspecting viewers.
The first episode shows potential, in a heightened, cheesy rom-com sort of way (there’s even a costume party celebrating famous rom-com characters like Buttercup and Westley from “The Princess Bride”). Although stereotyped and entirely predictable, the characters are appealing, and there’s enough interest in its left-at-the-altar cliffhanger to lure viewers back for another episode. But almost immediately thereafter, “Four Weddings” falls apart: Its characters become more unlikable than simply flawed, its plots more nonsensical than twisty and its episodes unbearably long.
The specter of the original looms throughout. But the revamped story lines are poorly executed imitations. Grant’s Charles slept with MacDowell’s Carrie while she was engaged to another
man, but Maya carries on an extended affair with a married man. Neither is morally great, but the length of her affair and the abhorrent behavior of her lover make Maya slightly less sympathetic than Charles ever was. Similarly, Charles leaves a fiancée at the altar in the film out of a seeming nobility, while Kash, in a modern wedding culture where engagements are long and deposits are large, seems entirely selfish.
Not all remakes or reboots are worse than their source material; some even transcend it.
But “Four Weddings” was best suited to a 2-hour film in the 1990s. It’s the kind of story that resists updates and reimagining, and no amount of charm from the actors or rom-com jokes from the writers can make it work in 2019.
It’s summertime, and we all have plenty of weddings to attend. It’s fine to RSVP “no” to this one.