You've Got Mail (1998)

I'll be arguing that You've Got Mail is, in fact, a Christmas movie and further that the movie implicitly tells us as much, despite simultaneously going out of its way not to set the bulk of its runtime on the holiday (at least not clearly), and further to obfuscate and play down the significance of holidays in general. However, from the perspective of a viewer, this is going to feel more like a movie with a few scenes around Christmas than anything you'd typically think of as a holiday movie, which is why I'll also be tagging this "Not Christmas." Its holiday connections aren't quite as much of a puzzle as, say, Alien: Covenant, but it's relationship with Christmas is more similar to that than, say, The Shop Around the Corner, despite being a loose remake of that film.

It's worth noting that the majority of the runtime of The Shop Around the Corner isn't centered around Christmas, either, but that film concludes with the holiday, using associations to convey the sense of a new beginning for the leads, as well as to reinforce a sense of family among the supporting cast. Nora Ephron doesn't do any of that here: the movie concludes in the spring (itself a symbol of fresh starts), themes of family are downplayed (there's still a supporting cast of delightful weirdos, but they're mostly relegated to comic relief), and the majority of scenes explicitly set at Christmas instead elicit a sense of sadness and loss.

Before I get into that, I want to highlight how much work the word "explicitly" is doing in that last sentence. You see, while only ten or so minutes are clearly set around Christmas, the timeline is extremely ambiguous, to the point it seems to be deliberately preventing the viewer from following the passage of time. Part of this is because the movie's calendar doesn't really make any sort of logical sense: the rate at which key plot points occur is often absurd (i.e.: a megastore goes from midway through construction to open for business in about a month). But even setting that aside, there's a great deal of uncertainty whether concurrent scenes are occurring moments or weeks apart. On top of that, the use of decorations and lights is often misleading, with shots framed to evoke a sense of Christmas even when it's a different season.

To clarify, none of that is a criticism or complaint. The movie is tonally close to a fairytale, so treating the passage of time as a sort of dreamlike transition is entirely appropriate. The approach feels intentional, not lazy. Moreover, unless you're engaging in the sort of unhinged analysis that would compel someone to try and estimate how much of the film is set during an arbitrary season, you're not going to notice. But as far as my admittedly weird obsession is concerned, it makes it difficult to nail down whether or not a significant portion of the runtime is set around Christmas, since the movie itself doesn't want to answer that question.

Back to that sense of sadness. This is all occurring at the point in the story where Meg Ryan's Kathleen is confronting the realization the megastore run by Tom Hank's Joe poses a threat to her independent bookstore. Not realizing she's communicating with Joe anonymously, she emails him the following message:

"It's coming on Christmas, they're cutting down trees." Do you know that Joni Mitchell song? "I wish I had a river I could skate away on?" It's such a sad song, and not really about Christmas at all, but I was thinking about it tonight as I was decorating my Christmas tree and unwrapping funky ornaments made of Popsicle sticks, and missing my mother so much I almost couldn't breathe.

On its own, it's one of the movie's most memorable moments. In the context of Christmas media, it's evocative of countless moments of dismay in which characters long for lost happy memories they associate with Christmases past while they confront a challenging and seemingly hopeless Christmas present. Longtime readers will know this is largely a post-war phenomenon in American Christmas movies and music: nostalgia in the face of uncertainty and fear.

But it's important not to lose sight of the significance of referencing the Joni Mitchell song, River. The song itself is a staple of Christmas compilations, in part because it encapsulates that emotional state I mentioned in the last paragraph. That's in spite the fact of the fact the song doesn't really seem to be about Christmas itself (though the lyrics certainly reference the holiday and associated elements), as Kathleen mentions. In a sense, her line is exploring Christmas as an associative element, more than an outright subject of art.

You'd be forgiven for assuming River was going to play over the end credits. Instead, as the movie concludes the following spring with Joe admitting his identity and the two admitting their feelings, two things happened: the song, "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" started playing, and I realized I was going to have to write this up as a sort of quasi-Christmas movie.

Somewhere Over the Rainbow elicits similar nostalgic connections to those in River, and it's even more of a iconic example of a song having nothing to do with the holidays being adopted into the Christmas music canon. Arguably, it's the definitive modern example, appearing on countless holiday albums (I discuss all this a bit more here). I should note that references to the classic tune also show up earlier in the movie's score, if you're paying attention.

I don't think it's a stretch to interpret the use of Over the Rainbow as a callback to the message about River, as the line works equally well for both songs. I also think it's fair to assume Ephron is referring to this movie as whole: it's not about Christmas, but it's intended to evoke feelings of nostalgia, hope, and love associated with the time. This certainly jives with the fluid depiction of time and seasons throughout, which tends to flow more like memory and emotion than a series of concrete events. In that sense, you could view the movie as less concerned with Christmas as a holiday than as a feeling connected to changing seasons and connected memories, all of which also explains why the movie goes to great lengths to ensure the seasons are present without fixating on or ever concretely being set on a holiday itself.

Now that we've covered all that, I suppose I should offer some thoughts on the movie in the off-chance anyone's still reading.

Overall, I found the film mixed. There's absolutely no denying it's charming - Ephron is a master at directing this stuff, and both Hanks and Ryan are legends for a reason - but I found myself frustrated almost as often as I was delighted (so mixed-to-positive, I suppose). The movie indulges in a handful of sequences that are a little too cute for their own good - there are a couple times Hanks should probably have been reined in (such as a scene where he expresses his emotional state by violently shaking a metal gate). In addition, the supporting characters feel underdeveloped and largely unnecessary. The movie seems to be trying to reference the ensemble in The Shop Around the Corner without taking the steps that made them arguably the most memorable parts of that film.

And speaking of The Shop Around the Corner... using that as the name of Kathleen's bookstore was cute at first, but it became old quickly. This is obviously a subjective complaint, but consider it another darling I'd rather have been stamped out.

The premise of the movie, of course, centers around updating that movie (or arguably the play they're both based on) for the modern era, with then newish email and chat replacing the original's letters. It's a idea that was maybe overplayed as a gimmick, complete with an infamous product tie-in to AOL, which I'm old enough to remember already felt dated when this was released. The movie would have worked better without the technology being centered so heavily, though who knows if it could have gotten the financing it needed.

On the subject of aspects that date the film, it's a little funny in hindsight how heavily Joe's mega-bookstore was positioned as the way of the future. The implication really seemed to be this was Borders in everything except its name. Ironically, small independent stores like Kathleen's really have fared better in an Amazon dominated world. That's more a historical note than a criticism: obviously, the movie had no way of knowing what the future would hold.

My largest actual issue with the movie concerns the last act. Like in the original, Joe learns Kathleen's identity a long time before she does. The Shop Around the Corner had the male lead use this to play with her in what was at the time considered adorably comical but now comes off as gaslighting. The movie tries to play this as a turnabout after a scene in which she comes off as cruel, but it really doesn't age well and is a big part of the reason I have a hard time connecting with the classic film.

Naturally, Ephron sets out to update this. The problem is that her solution involves ramping up the degree of the gaslighting. To be fair, the context surrounding how this is depicted is very different - he feels much less cruel in his actions, and it's presented as if Joe is trying to give Kathleen a chance to know him - but he's still lying to her, manipulating her assumptions, and controlling her with information he has access to. It's less blatantly mean than in the earlier film, but it still left me with a bad taste in my mouth.

It's also difficult to reconcile from a character perspective, since one of Kathleen's issues with Joe is that he withheld information about his identity when they first met. On top of all that, it just feels awkwardly rushed, as though the movie's attempting to fit an entire other romantic comedy in what amounts to an extended third act montage. You can see why the choice was made - they clearly want to give the characters a chance to bond as themselves before ending up together - but it's a situation where the costs may outweigh the gains.

Despite all that, I'm not at all surprised fans of this genre love this one. There's absolutely a lot here to appreciate, and the bulk of it is executed extremely well. I found myself pulled in by the whimsical tone at numerous points, though I kept getting pushed out again by various underdeveloped elements. This probably isn't the best romantic comedy for anyone who doesn't already love this genre and era, but the style and tone make it a must see for aficionados. As far as the holidays are concerned, it's not necessarily a great pick for those looking for something to watch over Christmas, but the unusual manner in which it circumnavigates the season makes for an interesting case study.

Comments