This is a movie that features the always enjoyable Morgan Freeman and a decent amount of female nudity. Those are pretty much the only real selling points.
Feast of Love focuses on a small group of people and the romantic contortions in which they engage. Harry (Morgan Freeman) is a college professor in Portland still coming to terms with a family tragedy. Harry is friends with Bradley (Greg Kinnear), a man who deeply needs to love but is so oblivious to the people he loves he doesn't notice his first wife (Selma Blair) is a lesbian and his second wife is an adulterous bitch. That second wife, Diana (Rhada Mitchell), lets herself be romanced by Bradley because he's so unobjectionable, even though she's really in angry, unhealthy love with another woman's husband. Bradley owns a coffee shop where Oscar (Tobey Hemingway) works, and Oscar falls in love at first sight with Chloe (Alexa Davalos), a coupling not approved of by Oscar's angry and violent father (Fred Ward).
I think the point of this story, which was adapted from a novel, is to make you think about the utility of love. At one point, Diana says love is a trick to get people to procreate while Bradley says love is everything. Is all the pain and difficulty of seeking out and pursuing love worth it? I'm not sure the answer offered up is supported by the evidence in the movie.
The fundamental problem of this film is that it never settles on a main character. At first, you think it's going to be Harry as the center of this romantically troubled crew. But then the movie focuses on Bradley's first wife and her yearning for a love she doesn't have. But after she leaves Bradley and hooks up with another woman, the movie forgets about her. Then you think the story might focus on Bradley and his recovery from a failed marriage, but as soon as he meets Diana the story focuses almost entirely on her and Bradley becomes a supporting character, until they break-up and the focus shifts again to Bradley. Even with Oscar and Chloe, the story starts out concentrating on Oscar and his poor upbringing but then, for no particular reason, shifts to looking at the relationship from Chloe's perspective and Oscar essentially disappears. As soon as you get interested in a character and their story, the film decides it's done with that person and brings someone else to the forefront.
The other significant problem with the film is that it wants to believe that no one ever really gets that angry. It wants us to accept and even endorse a world where Bradley's first wife cheats on him with another woman and his second wife cheats on him with another man, but after his third marriage he can still be friends and pal around with his exes. But when supposedly traumatic personal events don't have any emotional consequences, they don't have any emotional significance either.
As for Feast of Love's good points Morgan Freeman gives another fine performance and, yes, he does narrate parts of the movie. And Selma Blair, Rhada Mitchell and Alexa Davalos all look quite good naked, although there are moments when the movie is so gratuitously showing off their female forms that the only thing missing is a blinking neon sign that says "Nudes! Nudes! Nudes!"
Feast of Love isn't ultimately an aggressively bad film. It's just not good enough or perceptive enough to tell you anything about love and heartache you don't already know.
Feast of Love focuses on a small group of people and the romantic contortions in which they engage. Harry (Morgan Freeman) is a college professor in Portland still coming to terms with a family tragedy. Harry is friends with Bradley (Greg Kinnear), a man who deeply needs to love but is so oblivious to the people he loves he doesn't notice his first wife (Selma Blair) is a lesbian and his second wife is an adulterous bitch. That second wife, Diana (Rhada Mitchell), lets herself be romanced by Bradley because he's so unobjectionable, even though she's really in angry, unhealthy love with another woman's husband. Bradley owns a coffee shop where Oscar (Tobey Hemingway) works, and Oscar falls in love at first sight with Chloe (Alexa Davalos), a coupling not approved of by Oscar's angry and violent father (Fred Ward).
I think the point of this story, which was adapted from a novel, is to make you think about the utility of love. At one point, Diana says love is a trick to get people to procreate while Bradley says love is everything. Is all the pain and difficulty of seeking out and pursuing love worth it? I'm not sure the answer offered up is supported by the evidence in the movie.
The fundamental problem of this film is that it never settles on a main character. At first, you think it's going to be Harry as the center of this romantically troubled crew. But then the movie focuses on Bradley's first wife and her yearning for a love she doesn't have. But after she leaves Bradley and hooks up with another woman, the movie forgets about her. Then you think the story might focus on Bradley and his recovery from a failed marriage, but as soon as he meets Diana the story focuses almost entirely on her and Bradley becomes a supporting character, until they break-up and the focus shifts again to Bradley. Even with Oscar and Chloe, the story starts out concentrating on Oscar and his poor upbringing but then, for no particular reason, shifts to looking at the relationship from Chloe's perspective and Oscar essentially disappears. As soon as you get interested in a character and their story, the film decides it's done with that person and brings someone else to the forefront.
The other significant problem with the film is that it wants to believe that no one ever really gets that angry. It wants us to accept and even endorse a world where Bradley's first wife cheats on him with another woman and his second wife cheats on him with another man, but after his third marriage he can still be friends and pal around with his exes. But when supposedly traumatic personal events don't have any emotional consequences, they don't have any emotional significance either.
As for Feast of Love's good points Morgan Freeman gives another fine performance and, yes, he does narrate parts of the movie. And Selma Blair, Rhada Mitchell and Alexa Davalos all look quite good naked, although there are moments when the movie is so gratuitously showing off their female forms that the only thing missing is a blinking neon sign that says "Nudes! Nudes! Nudes!"
Feast of Love isn't ultimately an aggressively bad film. It's just not good enough or perceptive enough to tell you anything about love and heartache you don't already know.