“The Roses” (2025). Cast: Olivia Colman, Benedict Cumberbatch, Kate McKinnon, Andy Samberg, Allison Janney, Ncuti Gatwa, Sunita Mani, Zoë Chao, Jamie Demetriou, Belinda Bromilow, Delaney Quinn, Hala Finley, Ollie Robinson, Wells Rappaport, Caroline Partridge, Matt Corboy (voice). Director: Jay Roach. Screenplay: Tony McNamara. Book: Warren Adler, The War of the Roses (1981). Film: “The War of the Roses” (1989). Web site. Trailer.

When we’re fortunate enough to find ourselves in love, we should do all we can to cherish this blessing. After all, it seems like many more of us these days are having difficulty drawing this into our lives, so, when it’s present, we should do all we can to preserve and protect this precious commodity. Unfortunately, however, all too often we let incidentals get in the way of giving love its proper due. We may allow insignificant influences to intrude upon our appreciation and enjoyment of its many gifts, letting “the small stuff” get the better of us. What’s worse, though, is that we might end up taking it for granted, assuming it will always be there until one day when we realize it has disappeared – and may never come back. Such are the lessons offered up to us in the hysterical yet not always funny new dark romantic comedy, “The Roses.”

Theo and Ivy Rose (Benedict Cumberbatch, Olivia Colman) are a pair of successful British professionals living in London. Theo is an accomplished though sometimes-frustrated architect, while Ivy is a gifted chef who’s preparing to seek greener pastures in America. They meet during a chance encounter in the kitchen of the restaurant where Ivy works, and sparks quickly fly. They soon fall madly in love, marry and resettle in northern California, eventually becoming the proud parents of two children, Hattie (Delaney Quinn) and Roy (Ollie Robinson). Life, it would seem, is quite good – prosperous, fulfilling and overflowing with love.

In resettling in America, though, Ivy and Theo have followed different paths. Theo’s career has been steadily rising, while Ivy has become a stay-at-home mom, raising the kids and spending much of her time concocting spectacular culinary creations. However, given her largely domestic lifestyle, Ivy seems to have lost her edge – or at least set it off to the side – in favor of her new role. That’s particularly true when it comes to her passion for setting an inspired table. She still obviously relishes it, but only her family gets to sample her sumptuous wares. It’s almost as if she’s somehow grown underconfident, unsure of her ability to practice her craft for more than just those close to her.

Theo is somewhat troubled by Ivy’s apparent stagnation. He cares for her psychological and creative well-being and wants to do something to help her out. And, as fate would have it, that opportunity comes when he lands a plum contract to design a maritime museum. The commission lands him a generous financial windfall, which, in turn, he gifts to Ivy to fund the opening of her own eatery, an ocean-front seafood establishment she names We’ve Got Crabs.

Business starts off somewhat slow, causing concerns for the viability of the operation among her head waiter, Jeffrey (Ncuti Gatwa), and sous chef, Jane (Sunita Mani). But, as fate would once again have it, circumstances arise that get Ivy noticed, particularly by an influential food critic (Caroline Partridge). Before long, We’ve Got Crabs becomes a sensation, with more business – and hungry customers – than what Ivy knows what to do with.

Ironically, as Ivy’s star rises, Theo experiences just the opposite. A design flaw at the museum is exposed during a storm, causing the building – and his career – to collapse. In a heartbeat, he’s out of work with virtually no prospects for the future. However, Ivy’s newfound success comes to the rescue, enabling her to become the household’s principal breadwinner. And, while her fortunes continue to soar, she trades roles with Theo; he becomes a househusband responsible for tending to the home and raising the children, a venture he initially embraces reluctantly but at which he soon becomes quite adept.

In the ensuing years, Ivy becomes a celebrity chef and restaurateur, opening a chain of new dining outlets across the country. But fame and fortune come with a cost: relations between her and Theo become strained as she lives her dream and he settles for a life that doesn’t meet his needs for creative fulfillment, a growing cause for concern for her. What’s more, Ivy increasingly feels left out of her children’s lives, becoming less connected with them as they’ve grown older (Hala Finley, Wells Rappaport) and have become star athletes in their own right, a part of their lives from which she’s largely removed. What to do?

Ivy decides she needs to devise a way for Theo to feel as fulfilled in his calling as she has become in hers. And, now that she has the money to help make that possible, she returns the favor for Theo having bankrolled her success by financing his ambition of building a home of their dreams on the California coast. Suddenly, Theo is creatively rejuvenated, designing and building a state-of-the-art residence with top-notch amenities and aesthetics, including a spectacular ocean view. In the process, though, Theo starts spending money like a sailor on leave, placing the household’s finances in increasing jeopardy. In addition, he becomes so obsessed with the project that he begins to see it as his house, not theirs.

As this scenario plays out, the couple grows progressively estranged. Petty jealousies turn toxic, with squabbles growing into heated arguments with insults between them flying fast and furious. Others begin to notice as well, such as the kids, Ivy’s restaurant colleagues and the couple’s circle of friends (Kate McKinnon, Andy Samberg, Zoë Chao, Jamie Demetriou, Belinda Bromilow). And, when matters begin to turn violent, it’s obvious that the brimming love that once existed between Theo and Ivy has been shunted off to the side. Clearly, they can’t go on like this, raising the ugly prospect of divorce. Before long, Theo brings his legal counsel (Samberg) on board, while Ivy hires a hardened divorce lawyer, Eleanor (Allison Janney), who’s as vicious as the pet rottweiler she brings with her to the couple’s settlement discussion.

But hopes for a quick and amicable split evaporate immediately when the key stumbling block to arriving at an agreement surfaces: the disposition of the house. Both Theo and Ivy desperately want it – Theo, because he designed and built it as a crowning achievement of his creativity, and Ivy, because she paid for it. Their entrenched positions soon lead to a stalemate that grows ever more embittered and hostile as time passes and they each seek to stake their obsessive claim to the residence.

At this point, one can’t help but wonder, is this what a couple once so much in love has come to, a feuding, nasty pair of combatants who have allowed themselves to be consumed over the possession of a house? Isn’t that rather trivial in the greater scheme of things in comparison to what they once shared? Where did the love go? And why did they let it happen? Those are the key questions posed in this scenario, inquiries that they must earnestly address if they’re ever to reclaim happiness for themselves – let alone with one another – for the future.

If Ivy and Theo are to do that, though, they must seriously ask themselves what they want out of life and love, matters that require them to set priorities and examine the beliefs that underlie them, as well as the rationale and justification to support those positions. This is crucial in light of the role that our beliefs play in the manifestation of our existence, a product of the conscious creation process, the philosophy that makes such outcomes possible. It’s unclear whether Ivy and Theo have ever heard of this school of thought, but, considering their natural creative inclinations (and what they’ve produced as a result of them), it would seem that they might have a rudimentary understanding of this way of thinking and its underlying principles. More importantly, however, given the dicey predicament they’ve created for themselves legally, financially and emotionally, it would appear to be in their best interests to embrace this philosophy as a means to get them out of their dilemma and to start building a foundation for the future, whether individually or – dare we say it – together again.

Beliefs are the key in this, especially when it comes to deciding what’s truly most important going forward. Considering where they began, they got themselves off to an impressive start. They managed to create a satisfying life for themselves and their family. So where did they go wrong?

The foundation from where they began was clearly built on their belief in their love for one another, and, as anyone who has been in a successful romantic relationship can attest, that’s essential to make it work. Devotion to one’s partner should be the core principle driving the connection. This calls for paying attention to one another, never taking the other for granted and striving for ways to fulfill the associated needs to make life together happy, fulfilling and rewarding. And, as the film illustrates, the couple manages to do a good job with this, even when circumstances turn problematic. If nothing else, this shows that their underlying bond was quite strong and sufficiently resilient, qualities critical to making a love work and last.

But those nagging incidentals can have a way of devastatingly undermining matters when given too much power over romantic collaborators. When material considerations start taking precedence over emotional concerns, trouble is sure to lie ahead. Given what a gift true love is, one must ask oneself if a home or a business is really more valuable in the long run, especially when it threatens the ongoing viability of the partnership. Focusing on such issues to the detriment of what really matters most can seriously weaken the bond between loving partners. Is that worth it?

While the answer to this question might seem obvious, regrettably, it’s all too easy to allow ourselves to become distracted by these ancillary concerns. By pouring more of our energy and power into beliefs associated with such considerations, we may unwittingly deny these valuable resources to those constructs that, in the end, are more important for the long run. Is that ultimately a wise way to expend our emotional capital, for the manifestation of materializations that are essentially transient compared to what’s far more meaningful and longer lasting? That’s something we need to ask ourselves if we begin placing the small stuff ahead of what truly matters, a realization that Theo and Ivy are about to discover for themselves, an insight that could lead them to tremendous rewards or terrible consequences. In light of that, then, if we’re ever faced with comparable circumstances, we need to determine what’s ultimately more relevant, significant and fulfilling. After all, there’s a lot riding on the decision.

Reimagining a classic film like this can be tricky business, especially when it involves a picture that’s well-liked and well-known. But, with the right team behind such a project, the result can be positively delightful, and such is definitely the case with this reworking of the 1989 dark comedy, “The War of the Roses.” In fact, in this case, I’d even go so far as to say that this new production is actually an improvement over what I see as its often-overrated predecessor. Director Jay Roach’s scathingly biting comedy follows a story similar to its earlier iteration, but important tweaks have been made here to improve upon the Roses’ story and make it better than its forerunner. Nearly all of them are tied to the vastly improved writing at work compared to the original. The scope of the narrative has been significantly enlarged in this version, and all to the better, primarily due to the inclusion of an array of colorful supporting characters and a diverse palette of genuinely sidesplitting scenarios. In addition, the dialogue is crisper, snappier and faster paced, enabling the story to flow more like a screwball comedy than an embittered, often-dour and frequently nasty exercise. That’s not to suggest the lack of an edge in this updated production; quite the contrary. But the pacing, delivery and contents of its inspired and devastatingly hard-hitting one-liners are virtually nonstop, giving the picture a rapid-fire immediacy that its predecessor frequently lacked. Those qualities are further enhanced by sharper character development and the award-worthy spot-on performances of the two leads, whose undeniable chemistry makes their portrayals even more compellingly on target. Add to that the incisive contributions of the film’s fine ensemble (most notably McKinnon, Samberg and an effective but underused Janney), and you’ve got a cinematic formula that truly fires on all cylinders. Admittedly, there are a few narrative elements that could have been handled a little differently (most notably those related to the role of the children in the story), and some aspects of the screenplay feel a little overwritten at times, but these shortcomings are so minor that they’re hardly worth mentioning.

Considering how well everything meshes in this production, I must confess that I’m somewhat surprised that the picture was saddled with a late August release date, typically one of the movie industry’s distribution wastelands. I was also concerned in advance that this could have turned out to be another of those misguided remakes that have come to characterize so many of filmdom’s high-profile releases these days. But “The Roses” delivers the goods across the board and genuinely deserves an appreciative audience for its efforts as one of 2025’s better offerings, especially in the comedy genre. Don’t let preconceptions stand in your way of giving this one a look – you won’t regret it. The film is currently playing theatrically.

Many of us would like to think (or at least hope) that love will last indefinitely. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn’t. Ultimately, it depends on what we do with it when it shows up in our lives. If we take the right steps to ensure its continuation, it can endure and flourish. But, if we take it for granted or place higher priorities on other considerations, it can vanish almost as quickly as it often arrives. The experiences of Theo and Ivy Rose thus provide us with a potent cautionary tale about what to do – and what not to do – if we wish to see love persist. It may not call for a Herculean effort, but it does require a commitment to its preservation. And, after all, isn’t commitment what love is ultimately all about? Indeed, without that, what are we left with? Think about that the next time you find yourself alone – and wish you weren’t.

Copyright © 2025, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.