top of page
Writer's pictureKathy Carter

Attachment theory in popular culture – analysing the film Love, Actually

Now 21 years old, Richard Curtis' Love, Actually has become a Christmas staple on our screens. Some ague it hasn’t aged well – the patriarchy has a heavy hand, while the film lacks diversity, with its white, heteronormative love.

 

Yet it does possess a real charm for many people, and lends a comedic slant to its portrayal of difficult and complex relationships.

 

As with previous blogs here scrutinising fictional TV and film characters’ attachment styles, it seems high-time we looked at some of the Love, Actually characters’ styles of attachment. By examining these characters’ attachment styles, we can better understand their behaviours, relationships and emotional arcs within the film.

 

Types of attachment:

 

Attachment styles refer to patterns of relating to other humans that we learn as children, and which carry into our adult relationships.

 

The four primary styles are as follows -

 

*Secure Attachment: when we can balance dependence and independence in relationships, and feel secure in our own identity.

 

*Insecure Avoidant (or dismissive) attachment: here, we have an outwardly-seeming, strong sense of self-sufficiency, with the individual seeming more emotionally detached.

 

*Insecure Ambivalent (or preoccupied) attachment: we can feel more ‘needy’, and can be overly dependent in our relationships.

 

*Insecure Disorganised (or fearful) attachment: here, we may desire close relationships, yet fear vulnerability. Often related to trauma or family dysfunction, there’s often unpredictably in our relationships.

 

Karen, played by Emma Thompson – primarily Insecure Disorganised attachment

 

This is probably a very contentious thing to say, but I wonder whether Karen, played by Emma Thompson, could represent a primarily Insecure Disorganised (or fearful) attachment style in Love, Actually? She desires close relationships, yet fears vulnerability.

 

Humour me here! Karen is deeply invested in her family, seemingly deriving much of her identity and emotional fulfilment from her role as a wife and mother. However, the strain in her marriage to Harry (Alan Rickman) reveals a vulnerability often associated with ambivalent attachment aspects, as follows.

 

Karen’s neediness becomes apparent in her response to Harry’s emotional indiscretion with his secretary, Mia. Karen discovers a necklace that she initially believes is a gift for her, only to later receive a Joni Mitchell CD, realising the necklace was for Mia. This moment perhaps underscores some ambivalently attached tendencies: she craves security and validation in her relationship, but when faced with betrayal, Karen internalises her pain, symbolised by her quietly crying to ‘Both Sides Now’ before confronting Harry at the school play. He tells her he’s been “Such a fool”, and as Co-writer Emma Freud later revealed: “They stay together, but home isn’t as happy as it once was.”

 

It feels to me as if the ambivalent aspects of Karen’s attachment have led her to put Harry’s needs before her own, being overly forgiving, and not expressing her own needs (i.e. crying to herself in that achingly beautiful ‘Both sides now’ scene), enough.

 

YET – she can also be very cold herself. (“Joni Mitchell is the woman who taught your cold English wife how to feel.”) And she brushes off Daniel's phone call when he needs to talk (“It doesn't mean I'm not terribly concerned that your wife just died,”) and then later tells him to get a grip. It feels as if the avoidant aspects of her attachment are also playing a part, here.

 

A bit of a people pleaser

 

Karen projects an outwardly-seeming, strong sense of self-sufficiency, yet is both a bit of a people pleaser, and quite emotionally detached herself.

 

We don’t know about Karen’s upbringing, but it’s fair to say that her and her brother are upper-middle class… and given that Karen looks to be in her early forties in 2003, and was therefore born in the early 1960s, we could take a guess at the type of parenting she may have received (perhaps authoritarian father, and take-no-nonsense, stay at home mother?). All of this would have undoubtedly shaped her attachment style, as an adult.

 

Jamie, played by Colin Firth – eventually Secure attachment

 

Jamie’s character begins the film embodying primarily Insecure Avoidant attachment tendencies. After discovering his girlfriend’s infidelity, Jamie retreats to a rural French cottage, distancing himself from relationships, and focusing on writing. His avoidant behaviour perhaps stems from a fear of vulnerability and emotional dependency. The betrayal reinforces his belief that closeness leads to hurt, prompting his self-imposed isolation. (Interestingly, I also drew the same conclusion when the same actor played Mark Darcey in Bridget Jones – “A quick and cursory glance at the first page of Google sees that some people have a rather romanticised view, maintaining that Mark Darcy is securely attached. However I do not see it. For me he is primarily insecurely avoidantly attached, just like Daniel (Cleaver), however without Daniel’s narcissistic traits.”)

 

However, back to Love, Actually, and it feels to me that Jamie’s relationship with his housekeeper, Aurélia, leads to a fantastic transformation. Despite the language barrier (or maybe BECAUSE of it – e.g. the couple reply on intuition, and their nervous systems’ neuroception of each other?) Jamie grows to appreciate Aurélia’s kindness, thoughtfulness, and quiet understanding. Over time, their connection softens his defences, demonstrating how secure relationships can help individuals overcome avoidant tendencies.

 

The turning point for Jamie occurs when he decides to learn Portuguese, a symbolic gesture of commitment and vulnerability. His willingness to take emotional risks means he’s more open to a secure attachment style. His journey reflects the potential for growth and healing, showing how secure connections can help avoidant individuals embrace intimacy.

 

Colin, played by Kris Marshall -  primarily Insecure Ambivalent attachment

 

Colin is a humorous counterpoint to the film’s more serious love stories. He has a cavalier attitude toward relationships, focusing on casual encounters and immediate gratification, with zero emotional intimacy. This detachment aligns with dismissive-avoidant traits; a preference for independence and a tendency to downplay the importance of close bonds.

 

From the beginning, Colin’s approach to love is transactional and superficial; he seeks validation through fleeting sexual connections, rather than investing in meaningful relationships. When Colin achieves his goal, connecting with a group of American women who find his accent charming, there’s little evidence of emotional growth. We don’t get to see the commitment required for deeper connection – but maybe we just don’t know Colin very well at this stage? He is after all a comedic character written for laughs.

 

Mark, played by Andrew Lincoln – insecure attachment

 

The character of Mark hasn’t fared well over the passage of time. His love-bombing of his friend’s wife Juliet with those cards professing love at the front door is generally seen as less romantic, more creepy, in 2024. It’s hard to say what his attachment style is, but it isn’t securely attached!


His behaviours could depict a narcissistic personality type, and these individuals are always insecurely attached somehow, and self-absorbed at some level, as Mark is.

 

Joe, played by Gregor Fisher – secure attachment

 

Joe’s friendship with the singer he manages, Billy Mack (played by Bill Nighy), is one of unspoken affection; a really sweet and heart-warming story arc. Joe is Billy’s long-suffering manager, constantly supporting Billy through his outrageous behaviour and poor decisions. Joe stands by Billy even as the singer flippantly insults him or dismisses their work, reflecting a deep professional and personal loyalty. Billy even eventually drops his usual bravado to acknowledge that the relationship with Joe matters deeply to him, as Joe’s “The love of my life.” Joe doesn’t try to change Billy; he doesn’t become clingy or angry towards him; he’s just steadfast and secure in himself, allowing Billy to recognise the strength of their friendship.

 

So there we have it, some explorations of some of our favourite Love, Actually characters! Maybe as you watch it for the umpteenth time this festive season, you will have your own reflections?

 

 

Commenti


bottom of page