Released Aug. 29, “The Roses” is an absurdist comedy movie following the deteriorating marriage of Ivy (Olivia Colman) and Theo (Benedict Cumberbatch). Colman and Cumberbatch’s dry British humor — complemented by director Jay Roach’s knack for comedies — makes for a riotous and R-rated one hour and 45 minutes.
Roach’s remake of Danny DeVito’s 1989 film adaptation of the novel “The War of the Roses,” written by Warren Adler and published in 1981, stays relatively true to the original.
In Roach’s remake, he introduced a commentary on American society via the cultural differences the British protagonists experience while in the film’s American setting. Through this, Roach was able to add his own perspective, taking aim at gun control, the patriarchy and of course, marriage.
Beyond that, the core narrative of the film remains the same as the original; the couple meets, they marry, the housewife becomes financially independent and conflict ensues. Dark comedy is abundant throughout both films, but with British actors Colman and Cumberbatch filling in for Americans Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas in “The War of the Roses,” the humor takes on new forms. At times, their delivery is so deadpan it’s hard to distinguish what’s a joke and what’s sincere.
It’s here where “The Roses” blossoms: in the grey area. Even trying to find the genre of the film can cause a headache. There are aspects of a romantic comedy, though the film doesn’t follow the format, and there are moments of sincerity that are quickly overshadowed by absurdity — the heart of the film. Most of all, the audience doesn’t know what they want for the couple. Would they be better off separate? Was there ever even love?
To ask questions is to understand the film less. Asking viewers to let go of convention is hard to accept, but is vital for understanding and enjoying “The Roses.”
Take Ivy and Theo’s meeting story for example: Theo barges into a restaurant’s kitchen to avoid a tense company dinner. There, Ivy is working as a chef and immediately banters with Theo, despite him trespassing. After a brief exchange, they agree to consummate their relationship in a walk in freezer which leads to their eventual marriage.
Absurd? Yes. Explainable? No. This is Roach’s signal to the audience that this is not your typical romantic comedy. There’s no cute backstory that makes us feel the connection. We are forced to accept their love as truth and from then on, we are forced to accept many more absurdities.
The bending of genre convention is similar to that of Celine Song’s “Materialists,” where both films are more of a meta-romcom, or a film that presents itself as a romantic comedy but really intends to critique the genre and reveal something to the audience about their own expectations when it comes to love and movies about love. After all, romantic comedies have worked to shape expectations, realistic or not, about how relationships should be.
So meta-romcoms like “Materialists” and “The Roses,” although taking different approaches, both attempt to give audiences a new perspective while obscuring the ideas of what a romantic comedy is supposed to be.
“Materialists” takes a more head on approach by using the characters to directly represent ideas of romance, which some viewers saw as undermining its message and taking itself too seriously. “The Roses” is the other side of the spectrum, almost having too much fun.
In an interview with NPR, Colman commented on the attitude towards the romance in the film.
“It isn’t a Romeo and Juliet,” Colman said “[Ivy and Theo] make each other laugh, even with their insults.”
The usual format of a romantic comedy includes a shallow critique of society’s ideas about romance — while enforcing a litany of others — and the fate of the protagonist couple teaches the audience a profound truth about love.
For “The Roses,” the closest it got to becoming a true romantic comedy came from the musings of side couple Amy and Barry, played by Saturday Night Live alumni Kate McKinnon and Andy Samberg. They give advice along the lines of “sometimes you just hate your spouse” and “it’s okay to want other people as long as you’re content with your spouse in the end.” Roach launches subtle attacks at the idea that romantic comedies can be profound at all while ironically, being profound himself.
More evidence of the meta-romcom genre in “The Roses” comes from the career arcs of both Ivy and Theo. Their careers change so rapidly for the story, jabbing at the picturesque lives of typical romantic comedy protagonists.
On the other hand, their marriage falls apart just as conveniently. It takes a spontaneous opportunity to save a whale on the beach for Theo to realize that he does not want to be married to Ivy, and it takes a barrage of bullets from Ivy to change Theo’s mind right back in the end. The alignment of the stars to solidify their demise is just as ridiculous as the conception of every other rom-com’s love story. With a spectacularly tragic ending, Roach hammers the last nail in the coffin of every preceding romantic comedy — ironically in Shakespearean fashion.
Griffin Chan is an Arts & Entertainment Intern for the Summer 2025 quarter. He can be reached at griffilc@uci.edu.
Edited by Corinna Chin and Annabelle Aguirre
