Movie Review: Brooke Shields and Benjamin Bratt deserve more than Netflix's ‘Mother of the Bride’

Romantic comedies are in a destination wedding rut. Perhaps it’s a collective post-COVID wanderlust kicking in, or, more cynically, some combination of tax credits and a place producers want to spend time. But between “ Ticket to Paradise,” “Anyone But You,” “ Shotgun Wedding ” and now Netflix’s “ Mother of the Bride,” the conceit is starting to curdle.

The problem is bigger than the setting, of course. There’s only so much heavy lifting a picturesque location, photogenic bodies and enviable resort outfits can do to make up for a lame story. Also, the appeal of an out-of-reach travelogue is limited in this age of influencers living wildly extravagant lifestyles around the clock on Instagram and TikTok (not to mention the sharp ways “White Lotus” has skewered and luxuriated in those worlds).

“Mother of the Bride,” now streaming on Netflix, wonders what might happen if you find out a few days before the wedding that your kid (Miranda Cosgrove) is marrying the offspring of the guy who broke your heart. That’s what happens to Brooke Shields’ Lana. She arrives in Phuket, Thailand, for her daughter’s wedding, meets the groom (Sean Teale), turns around and sees that his father is her college ex, Will (Benjamin Bratt). Barely a minute passes before they both fall into a pond.

Later, she’ll walk in on him emerging from the shower, hit him in a sensitive spot playing pickleball and, after they’ve made some progress, overhear the wrong conversation at the wrong time. This is a movie that is adhering to some kind of romantic comedy checklist, but whose ingredients add up to very little in the end.

Our tolerance for a silly set-up in a romantic comedy is usually pretty generous if we’re given a clever, charming script and authentic emotions. Just think of how ridiculous so many of the greats sound on paper, from “Sabrina” to “Sleepless in Seattle”? Is it fair to compare “Mother of the Bride” to Nora Ephron and Billy Wilder? Maybe not, but it never hurts to be aware of a North Star, which veterans like screenwriter Robin Bernheim Burger and director Mark Waters no doubt are. Just look at the title. This movie even has a romantic foil in a younger doctor (Chad Michael Murray) who is smitten with Lana, which can’t help but remind of Keanu Reeves in Nancy Meyers' “Something’s Gotta Give.”

But this is so wildly contrived from the start that you never get to that moment where you’re enjoying it enough to stop asking questions, like did Lana never google Will in the 20 years they’ve been apart and find out that he’s a wildly rich and successful businessman? Or why would a major corporation offer an intern who has a barely maintained lifestyle Instagram that she started freshman year of college “six figures” to help promote their luxury hotels? Why are we supposed to root for these young people with seemingly infinite resources (one of their wedding presents in a multimillion Tribeca loft) who agree to get married in a month because a brand asks them to? Maybe more fundamentally, did the kids and a wedding have to be involved in this story at all? Does it make the idea of Will and Lana getting back together too weird to be fun? Couldn’t they have simply run into one another at a resort?

I won’t go so far as to say that “Mother of the Bride” feels like an AI creation but it does feel at least a little stitched together from pieces of other romantic comedies of varying quality. Why cast a capable comedian like Rachel Harris as the best friend only to have her say lines like “Is he on the menu”? Or give Wilson Cruz so little to do as Will’s brother?

And it’s a shame, too, because Shields and Bratt came ready to play, to fall in the pond and be minimally clothed for comedy’s sake. There must be a new generation of romantic comedy writers and directors who grew up on Ephron and Meyers out there and are ready to give us something that’s commercial and glossy but also smart and fun to revisit (ahem, remember “Set It Up”?). Maybe they just need to be given a shot.

“Mother of the Bride,” a Netflix release streaming Thursday, is rated TV-PG. Running time: 90 minutes. One and a half stars out of four.

This image released by Netflix shows Sean Teale and Miranda Cosgrove in a scene from "Mother of the Bride." (Sasidis Sasisakulporn/Netflix via AP)

This image released by Netflix shows Benjamin Bratt in a scene from "Mother of the Bride." (Sasidis Sasisakulporn/Netflix via AP)

This image released by Netflix shows Brooke Shields and Rachael Harris in a scene from "Mother of the Bride." (Sasidis Sasisakulporn/Netflix via AP)

This image released by Netflix shows Miranda Cosgrove, left, and Brooke Shields in a scene from "Mother of the Bride." (Sasidis Sasisakulporn/Netflix via AP)

This image released by Netflix shows Chad Michael Murray and Brooke Shields in a scene from "Mother of the Bride." (Sasidis Sasisakulporn/Netflix via AP)

This image released by Netflix shows Brooke Shields and Benjamin Bratt in a scene from "Mother of the Bride." (Sasidis Sasisakulporn/Netflix via AP)

LONDON (AP) — WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange faced a hearing Monday in the High Court in London that could end with him being sent to the U.S. to face espionage charges, or could provide him another chance to appeal his extradition.

The outcome will depend on how much weight judges give to assurances U.S. officials have provided that Assange’s rights won’t be trampled if he goes on trial.

In March, two judges rejected the bulk of Assange's arguments but said he could take his case to the Court of Appeal unless the U.S. guaranteed he would not face the death penalty if extradited and would have the same free speech protections as a U.S. citizen.

The court said that if Assange, who is an Australian citizen, couldn’t rely on the First Amendment then it was arguable his extradition would be incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, which also provides free speech and media protections.

The U.S. has provided those reassurances, though Assange's legal team and supporters argue they are not good enough to rely on to send him to the U.S. federal court system.

The U.S. said Assange could seek to rely on the rights and protections of the First Amendment but that a decision on that would ultimately be up to a judge. In the past, the U.S. said it would argue at trial that Assange is not entitled to the constitutional protection because he is not a U.S. citizen.

“The U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can ‘seek to raise’ the First Amendment if extradited,” his wife, Stella Assange, said. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family’s extreme distress about his future — his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism.”

Assange, 52, has been indicted on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse over his website’s publication of a trove of classified U.S. documents almost 15 years ago. American prosecutors allege that Assange encouraged and helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to steal diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks published.

Commuters emerging from a Tube stop near the courthouse couldn’t miss a large sign bearing Assange’s photo and the words, “Publishing is not a crime. War crimes are.” Scores of supporters gathered outside the neo-Gothic Royal Courts of Justice chanting “Free Julian Assange” and “Press freedom, Assange freedom.”

Some held a large white banner aimed at President Joe Biden, exhorting: “Let him go Joe.”

Assange's lawyers say he could face up to 175 years in prison if convicted, though American authorities have said any sentence would likely be much shorter.

Assange’s family and supporters say his physical and mental health have suffered during more than a decade of legal battles, which includes seven years spent inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London from 2012 until 2019. He has spent the past five years in a British high-security prison.

Assange’s lawyers argued in February that he was a journalist who exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sending him to the U.S., they said, would expose him to a politically motivated prosecution and risk a “flagrant denial of justice.”

The U.S. government says Assange's actions went way beyond those of a journalist gathering information, amounting to an attempt to solicit, steal and indiscriminately publish classified government documents.

If Assange prevails Monday, it would set the stage for an appeal process likely to extend what has already been a long legal saga.

If the court accepts the word of the U.S., it would mark the end of Assange’s legal challenges in the U.K., though it’s unclear what would immediately follow.

His legal team is prepared to ask the European Court of Human Rights to intervene. But his supporters fear Assange could be transferred before the court in Strasbourg, France, could halt his removal.

Judges Victoria Sharp and Jeremy Johnson may also postpone issuing a decision.

If Assange loses in court, he still may have another shot at freedom.

Biden said last month that he was considering a request from Australia to drop the case and let Assange return to his home country.

Officials provided no other details but Stella Assange said it was “a good sign” and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the comment was encouraging.

FILE - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange being taken from court, where he appeared on charges of jumping British bail seven years ago, in London, Wednesday May 1, 2019. Assange faces what could be his final court hearing in England over whether he should be extradited to the United States to face spying charges. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham, File)

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US

London court to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Assange is extradited to the US