Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

atlasmb One of those films about the relationship between a straight woman and a gay man, "The Object of My Affection" tells of Nina Borowski (Jennifer Aniston) and George Hanson (Paul Rudd), best friends whose affections know almost no limits. The story is infused with the music and words of "You Were Meant for Me"--sung variously by Gene Kelly, Audra McDonald, and Sting. It's a fitting theme, romantically suggesting that perhaps a higher power or fate ordains there is one perfect match for every person. And that we cannot deny what is written in the stars. But Nina and George are somewhat confused by what the stars are telling them.Both characters are, at turns, bedeviled by confusion and/or guilt as their joint path veers from one route to another. The two actors are convincing, in a romantic-comedy way; this is not "Sophie's Choice" after all. But a tenderness pervades the film and will touch the hearts of many viewers.For fun, watch for young Hayden Panettiere in her first film appearance.

studioAT Of all the 'Friends' cast it is Jennifer Aniston who has gone on to have the most successful film career, not least helped by the fact that she has found her niche making romantic comedies like this one.That doesn't mean to say that they've all been good. While better than 'Picture Perfect' I didn't find much to enjoy in this film that tries to be both serious and funny at times, and doesn't do either well.Aniston and Rudd have good chemistry but yet are upstaged every time Allison Janney appears on camera.It's a passable enough film, but not one I'd rush to see again.

Gruesome Glamour My guilty-pleasure enjoyment of Hollywood romantic comedies is just one of the things that ostracizes me from the rest of the populace. Because I know the type of person who quietly watches something like a Sandra Bullock movie and thinks about tying Denis Leary up so we can fully iron out the terms of our rocky relationship (if it wasn't rocky, it wouldn't be a "comedy" now would it?), and demanding security in his commitment before I continue with the wining and dining process, is not typically the same type of person who enjoys watching horror films for the love of art. That's me, flaws and all. I am a freak full of vigor, but darn it- I want total control. That's why this kind of movie makes me all noodle-like. I'm too wishy-washy (like that pioneer of discontent, Charlie Brown before me) to tell the world that this is not the way things should be. The lives Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd lead in this movie are the result of not having the guts to tell other people what they want. They still get what they want, which is the product of the Happy Ending disease of Hollywood cinema. But do I really have to sit and watch them talk and talk, without just coming out and saying: "this is what I want"? I hope that's not too cryptic.Anyway, the answer to that question is: yes. I have to sit and watch this talky movie. Not because it's a Hollywood film from a fairly homophobic studio about a gay man and his quest to become a father... with a woman having a straight man's baby. But because all the good-looking men in this movie are idiots. Except the young guy, Paul - played by the dreamy and very talented Amo Gulinello (who has since been completely buried in the cast list under a mountain of bit part players just because years later they did high-profile movies and shows). I have a theory about really good-looking men. I find almost all of them under the age of 25 only get attention for being very good looking, and then later can only combat becoming a complete moron if they are raised by really intelligent but also easy-going and honest parents. Not honest in the eyes of the world. Because, who cares what everyone else thinks? But honest in that they don't lie to or hold potentially vital information from their children.Jennifer Aniston's Nina is so flawed, her drama in the movie is barely worth discussing. Let me just say though that, while I'm sure every romantic comedy fan in the audience will shout: "you can do so much better than Vince!," meaning the character (not actor Vince Vaughn), I found John Pankow absolutely irresistible in the film. And that the type of guy he was playing was not given a fair chance to prove his sensitivity in the first 50 or so minutes of the movie. And why is that? Because Aniston could never tell him what she wanted. You may feel the urge to bring up the scene where she tells him that is his fault. But, I think it's her fault. I don't usually blame the woman, but in this movie I'm blaming George and Nina as a couple for the problems they encountered. Because together, they had the perfect excuse to never be honest. It would hurt the other's feelings. I'll bet that was the reason.Anyway, when watching would-be serious movies, I like to pick a character to identify with. In this movie, I wanted to be George. Not because I have ever cried thinking: "why can't I be a father" (thank God for that). But because I haven't had any luck in love and could easily see the attraction to a guy like Tim Daly's character. A pretty obvious manipulator. Other than intense good looks, he wouldn't keep his mouth shut about something even if he thought he'd swallow his shoe if he left it open. He's reliable and predictable. And God, that's what I want in a lover. I like surprises, but they also scare me. Again- I want total control. This kind of movie is not for people like me. But it is enough seeds to be able to make something grow out of it. As a piece of film-making, it's at least better crafted than a huge slew of modern Hollywood romantic movies. As formula, it's quite sloppy at times. But it mistakes its way into, I think, portraying George's new relationship with a younger guy with a sweet wild streak that makes me smile. It's not a movie that will challenge you to think much, but it won't hurt your face by making you frown too much either.

fontainemoore It's a "small" movie but quirky, endearing, and with a very strong moral about how things can get worked out in unconventional but satisfying ways. Jennifer Anniston was delightful and very believable as the beleaguered Nina. Paul Rudd was adorable, if a tad less convincing. And Rodney, who delivered the line that provided the film's title, was deliciously subtle and heartbreaking.Allison Janney was a stitch as Constance and I really enjoyed the interaction between her and Alda. Most of all, I loved the expression, "head up, young person" and use it frequently. It was certainly a major part of the plot and the film's point. When life hands you lemons...Every film has some unique little theme and this one was a delight, as was Madam's color-coordinated eye patch. This and much else in the film indicated some very subtle as well as slapstick humor and very good writing, which is absent in far too many films. If you look at this film as beyond another pleasant "chick flick" I think you'll find it.