The Roses

I think you can tell when actors are enjoying making a film, and both Olivia Colman and Benedict Cumberbatch look like they enjoyed letting the badger loose here. He’s an architect and she a budding chef when they meet in her kitchen. A tiny bit of raw trout later - might that be a euphemism - and they are wed and we have skipped on to their lives in California. They have two children and he has just designed a daring new maritime museum. He doesn’t get to sit on his laurels for long though as an opening night storm causes this couple to have to consider some role reversing. Now, not only is “Ivy” the bread maker, but she’s the bread winner too. When a food critic stops by her seaside bistro and acclaims it wildly, “Theo” is consigned to a role of unfulfilled husbandry and child-minding whilst his wife puts in the hours and delivers the cash. Enough cash, it turns out, for him to design and built his dream home - complete with an ancient Spanish table, some Irish roof moss and a computer called, wait for it, “Hal”! After a while, they soon realise that all is not well with the “Rose” family, and when the children win an early scholarship she realises she has missed much of their childhood and he realises he has missed much of his life! Can they settle things or are events in their seaside home about to recreate those from 15th century England? Luckily for us, it is the latter and so some scheming, bad-mouthing and the militarisation of crabs, oranges and hard skin ensues as this couple take squabbling to a new, and entertaining, level. There are a few others involved now and again. Apparently “Jeffrey” (Ncuti Gatwa) is quite proficient at blowing truck drivers but his pal “Barry” (Andy Samberg) is no match for “Eleanor” (Allison Janney) on the legal front and their marriage guidance counsellor is far more likely to be in need of therapy herself that to be able to dispense any. The writing takes the rise out of what little lovey-dovey sentiment there is whilst giving both leading characters plenty of weapons with which to pithily assault each other and make us smile at the same time. I’m not sure it’s a film that will last, or that even I’d bother to watch again - but it’s an enjoyable ninety-odd minutes of cinematic custard-pie throwing and I did quite enjoy it.

Reimagining a classic film can be tricky business, especially when it involves one that’s well-liked and well-known. But, with the right team behind such a project, the result can be positively delightful, and such is definitely the case with this reworking of the 1989 dark comedy, “The War of the Roses.” In fact, in this case, I’d even go so far as to say that this new production is actually an improvement over its often-overrated predecessor. Director Jay Roach’s scathingly biting comedy follows the lives of Theo and Ivy Rose (Benedict Cumberbatch, Olivia Colman), a pair of successful British professionals who quickly fall madly in love, marry and resettle in northern California, eventually becoming the proud parents of two children. Theo is an accomplished architect, while Ivy is a gifted but underconfident chef who concocts spectacular culinary creations that only her family gets to sample. However, when Theo lands a plum contract to design a museum, he comes into a windfall whose proceeds he gifts to Ivy to launch her own eatery. As fate would have it, though, the partners’ fortunes trade places, with Ivy becoming a huge hit that leads to the opening of a chain of restaurants and Theo’s career taking an unexpected tumble, relegating him to the role of househusband as he struggles to revive his sagging reputation. This invariably leads to mounting petty jealousies and intensifying marital discord between two spouses who ostensibly once seemed to love one another deeply – and all with wickedly hilarious results. So what makes this version of the Roses’ story better than its forerunner? Several factors play into this, but nearly all of them are tied to the vastly improved writing at work here compared to the original. The scope of the narrative has been significantly enlarged in this iteration, and all to the better, primarily due to the inclusion of an array of colorful supporting characters and a diverse palette of genuinely sidesplitting scenarios. In addition, the dialogue is crisper, snappier and faster paced, enabling the story to flow more like a screwball comedy than an embittered, often-dour and frequently nasty exercise. That’s not to suggest the lack of an edge in this updated production; quite the contrary. But the pacing, delivery and contents of its inspired and devastatingly hard-hitting one-liners are virtually nonstop, giving the picture a rapid-fire immediacy that its predecessor frequently lacked. Those qualities are further enhanced by sharper character development and the award-worthy spot-on performances of the two leads, whose undeniable chemistry makes their portrayals even more compellingly on target. Add to that the incisive contributions of the film’s fine ensemble (most notably Kate McKinnon, Andy Samberg and Allison Janney), and you’ve got a cinematic formula that truly fires on all cylinders. Admittedly, there are a few elements that could have been handled a little differently, and some aspects of the screenplay feel a little overwritten at times, but these shortcomings are so minor that they’re hardly worth mentioning. Considering how well everything meshes in this production, I must confess that I’m somewhat surprised the picture was saddled with a late August release, typically one of the movie industry’s distribution wastelands. I was also concerned in advance that this could have turned out to be another of those misguided remakes that have come to characterize many of filmdom’s high-profile releases these days. But “The Roses” delivers the goods across the board and genuinely deserves an appreciative audience for its efforts as one of 2025’s better offerings, especially in the comedy genre. Don’t let preconceptions stand in your way of giving this one a look – you won’t regret it.