Yours, Mine and Ours

Copyright © 2005 by PARAMOUNT PICTURES. All Rights Reserved. Photo Credit: Sam Emerson.

 
The eight Beardsley children and their father Frank (Dennis Quaid) run a tight ship… their home, that is. On the other hand, Helen (Rene Russo) and the ten North children are like a living model of free association.

The Beardsleys have just moved in after the father gets the latest of many transfers in his duty as an Admiral of the U.S. Coast Guard. They have family drills, scheduled bathroom usage, and some of the kids refer to their father as “Admiral.” By contrast, the North children express themselves through song, or painting the roses in the garden bed (painting them, not making a painting of them), and by helping their mother with designs for her line of clothing and accessories.

However, Frank seems to need a little chaos in his ordered life. Helen, as evidenced by a night of watching “An Officer and a Gentleman,” seems to desire a bit of polish around the rough edges of her life. The two don’t immediately meet. While set adrift on a blind date with a woman who happens to be the ex-wife of Frank’s friend, Darrell (David Koechner)—who also arranged the date, Frank bumps into Helen. They recognize each other, as it turns out, because they were once high school sweethearts—King and Queen of their prom. At first, they’re held back by each having the impression that the other is married.

This is where the story takes an interesting spin that sets it apart from the otherwise comparable “Cheaper by the Dozen,” as well as several other films that would use the misunderstanding and lack of communication regarding their marital status as a suspense mechanism that gets dropped at the last minute to save the plot. Instead, the film gets past that immediately and into the logistical nightmare of a marriage producing a cooperative (or “uncooperative,” depending on how you look at it) of eighteen children.

Both films are based on books written by the people living these circumstances (“Cheaper by the Dozen” by Frank B. Gilbreth and “Who Gets the Drumsticks?” by Helen Eileen Beardsley), but in this case the family is beset by more than merely the natural inertia of many heads under one house.

The two eldest daughters, Phoebe North (Danielle Panabaker) and Christina Beardsley (Katija Prevec), are diametric opposites—an artisan/musician and a cheerleader, respectively. William Beardsley (Sean Faris), Frank’s “first mate,” has applications pending at a number of top universities, and his new roommate Dylan North (Drake Bell)—no doubt named after a certain other Dylan from Hibbing, Minnesota—decorates his bedside with spray paint.

Bonding exercises, including a sailing trip encouraged by Frank, have the opposite of the intended effect. Eventually, what does unite them is the common goal of desiring a way out of their much-detested co-existence. The Beardsley kids, upset by the unstructured bathroom usage of the North kids, decide to uproot them by making “unauthorized” alterations to the bathroom schedule. Eventually, the two sides’ mutual hatred grows and, while the housemaid, Mrs. Munion (Linda Hunt), is left in charge (which, of course, means watching wrestling while downing martinis), all out paint-and-water wars ensue, nearly destroying the large coastal house which now accomodates the joint family.

In a reverse twist to the “Parent Trap”-style plot, the children from both sides, who initially cannot stand each other, deliberately try to sabotage the marriage into which Frank and Helen enter rather abruptly. Eventually, their efforts lead to an uncomfortable discussion about corporal punishment which brings out the differences in Frank and Helen… which is not to say their divergent parenting styles weren’t obvious from the beginning. But, like many things in life, this becomes a sticking point by which other arguments become magnetized.

The various family conundrums unfold as relatively predictable, Rube Goldbergian sight gags run amok, but they’re somewhat excusable given the younger half of the family audience for this film. Directed by Raja Gosnell, who also directed the admirably innocent “Never Been Kissed,” the actors here don’t possess the comedic timing of Lucille Ball (who starred in the 1968 original)… but who does? I especially like the infinitesimal cuteness of Mick North (Slade Pierce), as well as the rivalry (and then cameraderie) between the two eldest sisters.

The irony is rather obvious, yes, that in conspiring to tear their families apart so they don’t have to live together, the kids actually learn to work together as a team. People are probably going to be confused by my appreciation of this film and what seems like indifference in my review of “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.” But for “Harry Potter” my expectations are higher… because: a) I think the “Potter” movies are capable of more engaging and unique story, characters and visual delights, and b) there are three other “Potter” movies which should, if anything, motivate audiences to expect more from each successive effort.

There are relatively unexplored subplots concerning Frank’s potential succession of his close friend and superior, Coast Guard Academy Commandant Sherman (Rip Torn), as well as with Helen and her associate Jerry (Max), with whose assistance she’s attempting to land a major deal with Saks Fifth Avenue. These subplots are inconsequential scaffolds, propped up almost exclusively to pull the family interests in two directions to inflate tensions. That seems unnecessary given the kids efforts to sabotage the marriage, but then I’d look like a fool if these issues happened to be part of the factual story that ultimately inspired this film. Considering that the real story actually did involve the logistical nightmare of raising twenty kids (their eighteen, plus two more from the marriage), it’s clear that more outrageous things have happened.

For “Yours, Mine and Ours” the expectations are set by films like “Cheaper by the Dozen” and, perhaps, 1987’s mediocre “Overboard”* (dir. Garry Marshall). Light family problem comedies don’t give their actors much room to stray beyond the formula that studios rely upon to fill the largest number of seats… but as such films go, this one still falls just this side of “barely watchable.”

* NOTE: I mentioned that “Overboard,” starring Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell, was mediocre. True. However, it still happens to have more genuine charm than this movie, emanating largely from Goldie Hawn’s performance—handling her new children, and her “new” husband, with the resourcefulness and instincts of an honestly good mother who, exasperated as she may become at times, means well (even if the kids happen to superglue her hands to the dishes). Call it one of my “guilty pleasure” quasi-romantic comedies that, if it’s to be on cable and I happen to catch it as I’m flipping channels, I’m usually inclined to stop and watch it.

Yours, Mine & Ours • Dolby® Digital surround sound in select theatres • Running Time: 90 minutes • MPAA Rating: PG for some mild crude humor. • Distributed by Paramount Pictures