The Roses - a modern remake that misses the mark and is saved only by its two leads.

​3 out of 5

The 2025 remake of The War of the Roses, now simply titled The Roses, arrived in our cinemas with an immense amount of buzz. Indeed in a recent visit to London I as caught up in the red-carpet event at the Leicester Square Odeon premierie. With a cast led by two of the most prestigious actors working today, Olivia Colman and Benedict Cumberbatch, and a screenplay from the talented Tony McNamara of The Favourite and Poor Things fame, expectations were deservedly high. The film successfully updates the premise for a modern audience, exploring the friction between two high-achieving professionals, Theo, a struggling architect, and Ivy, a wildly successful chef. The new dynamic, which sees Ivy's career take off just as Theo's collapses, provides a fresh and relatable conflict that feels perfectly suited for today. Watching these two acting titans trade increasingly barbed insults and passive-aggressive jabs is, for the most part, an absolute treat, and they effortlessly carry the film on their immense chemistry. Without them, this would be a poor 2 out of 5 review.

However, the film ultimately feels like a diluted version of its gleefully mean-spirited predecessor. Where the 1989 film was a masterful, escalatingly dark descent into madness, this new version, directed by Jay Roach, feels oddly restrained. The satirical edge is blunted by an overly glossy, almost rom-com-like sheen that works against the intended black comedy. Instead of truly digging into the tragicomic reality of a marriage imploding with vicious cruelty, the movie often pulls its punches, opting for more polite, if still sharp, squabbles over genuinely brutal warfare. This reluctance to go to a truly dark place prevents the film from achieving the classic status of the original.

The film's missteps aren't limited to its tone. The supporting cast, including comedic powerhouses Andy Samberg and Kate McKinnon, feels disappointingly underutilized. Their comedic stylings, while brilliant in other projects, feel out of place here and occasionally clash with the central, more grounded conflict. McKinnon's broad, sketch-comedy-style performance, in particular, drains some of the much-needed emotional weight and cruelty from the picture. They are fantastic actors, but the script gives them little to do besides serve as bland, peripheral witnesses to the main event.

The most compelling aspect of the remake—the modern-day role reversal—is also where it falters. While Ivy's professional rise and Theo's stay-at-home arc are interesting on paper, the film doesn't fully explore the psychological toll this takes on the characters. Theo's resentment feels more like a surface-level complaint than a deep-seated identity crisis, and Ivy's frustration seems to stem from generic relationship issues rather than the unique pressures of her new career. We are told about their "toxic hate," but we don't always feel it with the gut-punch intensity of the original.

For a film with a screenplay from the writer behind The Favourite and Poor Things, the dialogue is surprisingly less acidic. While there are some genuinely funny lines and clever one-liners, the biting, unforgiving wit that defines McNamara's other work is largely absent. This is most apparent in the chaotic final act, which, while visually engaging, feels rushed and doesn't quite earn the shocking conclusion it's aiming for, leaving the audience with a sense of an ending that was more convenient than earned.

Ultimately, The Roses is a perfectly watchable film that delivers on the core premise of its two lead stars being brilliant. It's an entertaining, if not entirely memorable, two-hour diversion. It's a testament to the power of its leads that the film works at all, but one can't help but feel it could have, and perhaps should have, been so much more. It’s a fun ride, but it lacks the vicious bite and enduring power of the original that made it a classic.