Primary navigation
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d0bf7/d0bf740417a15be6128c338f45cbd284decb559c" alt="Cover of Sight & Sound June 1999."
USA/UK 1999
Reviewed by Charlotte O'Sullivan
Our synopses give away the plot in full, including surprise twists.
Divorcee William Thacker runs an ailing travel bookshop in Notting Hill, a London neighbourhood. One day a film star, Anna Scott, buys a book from him. Shortly afterwards, they messily collide in the street. William invites Anna back to his house to clean up, where impulsively she kisses him. Some days later, William discovers that Anna has phoned. The couple arrange a date - it's William's sister Honey's birthday, so they all meet at William's friends Bella and Max's house. Afterwards, Anna invites William up to her hotel room but they find Anna's boyfriend there on a surprise visit. William beats a swift retreat.
Salacious shots of Anna appear in the newspapers, and she seeks refuge at William's house where they have sex. The following morning, the press are at the door. Furious, Anna accuses William of setting her up, although it was his flatmate Spike who accidentally tipped off the press. Seasons pass. Filming a Henry James adaptation in London, Anna invites William to meet her on the set. She seems pleased to see him, but William overhears her dismissing him to a fellow actor, so he sidles away. A contrite Anna appears at the bookshop, but William rejects her. Realising his mistake, he chases after her. He arrives at her press conference and declares his love. Some time later, Anna is pregnant with William's child.
Notting Hill is a sly film. Although in many ways it exploits the Four Weddings and a Funeral formula screenwriter Richard Curtis created, it's actually quite a different beast. In Four Weddings, 'vulgar' America is in thrall to cultured, wealthy Britain. But aside from such embarrassing worship, the US barely figures in it (Andie MacDowell's character could have been any nationality). In Notting Hill there's no competition: big, bold, glamorous America is on top; Britain has banana-slipped from importance to impotence. In Four Weddings, Hugh Grant's character knew one of the "sixth richest men in Britain"; here all his friends are financial failures. America is shown to have a clear identity, while Britain is all at sea. Anna is a somebody; William (mistaken first for a journalist, then a room-service cleaner) could be anybody. Such an antagonism can be enjoyable, and the sections of the film that deal with Anna/America's narcissistic prowess are remarkably acute. Grant, meanwhile, makes the most of his role, the perfectly pained martyr to comic calamity.
It's the emphasis on William and Britain's high-brow "crapness" that fails to convince because Notting Hill - a British film, after all - is obsessed with money and success. When Anna gives William a Chagall painting, his friends ask, "Is it the original?" - in other words, is it valuable? Learning it is, they give the relationship the go-ahead. In the film's scheme of things, Henry James is also good because a slice of his classy prose gets Anna an Oscar.
Of course James - that great chronicler of doomed Anglo-American relations - would have been horrified by this film's disingenuous attitude to economics (we never find out where William gets the money to afford such a posh address). Nor would James have understood the presentation of the British as 'innocents'. Each time we're asked to watch William the Non-Conqueror, all we can think is how well his tribe has colonised Notting Hill. That's why the US has to appear so dominant and knowing, the uber-colonial power. Who else could make Willy seem like an underdog? In Four Weddings, we enjoyed cheering on the British rich. Now we have to be tricked into it.
But does Notting Hill really want its cynical project to succeed? We're asked to see William/Britain and Anna/America as polar opposites and yet, on some strange, murky level, we're led to suspect they're the same. When Anna's sexual indiscretions come back to haunt her via the tabloids, it's hard not to remember Grant's own true-life brush with scandal. When she compounds her error by sleeping with him, she says, "Newspapers last forever - I'll regret this forever." This is uncannily significant dialogue. Who would understand this sentiment more than Grant?
The film is also intent on reminding us of the duplicity of actors, not least Anna, who, as her reference to Gilda makes clear, comes from a long line of snaky females. In fact the whole tribe are bad - as we see with Anna on the Henry James set, they're notoriously "indiscreet". But Grant's public image and charm are inextricably tied to his unreliability. In the homage to his personality that was Four Weddings, his character's bitchy indiscretion was intriguingly turned into a virtue. In this film, when asked why his wife left him, he winces and says, "She saw through me." We're meant to see this as marvellous self-deprecation, but it's one of the few lines that rings true. Anna is the official actor in this relationship, but William - an instinctive actor - appears equally untrustworthy.
Viewed in this light, intentional or not, it makes perfect sense that William's proposal is offered (and accepted) in front of hundreds of journalists. For both Anna and William, the media provide a stage and audience. If we're to draw any conclusions from this slight but canny film, it's that the Anglo-American contest is a fake: after centuries of conflict, these two countries are culturally one and the same and really do deserve each other.