Unusual Romance Told With Great `Affection' Rudd, Aniston sparkle in gay-straight love story

The loving relationship between a gay man and a straight woman turned out to be a surprising selling point of ``My Best Friend's Wedding.'' I hope there will be a similar stampede to see ``The Object of My Affection,'' a less frothy and more honest portrait of such a relationship and the best romantic comedy so far this year.

For this genre to work, there has to be a convincing obstacle in the way of two people obviously meant for each other, and differing sexual preferences would seem to be a brick wall.

By letting the romance between Nina (Jennifer Aniston) and George (Paul Rudd) develop slowly, the movie builds a case for plausibility. They meet at the kind of Manhattan cocktail party that could be the subject of a New Yorker cartoon. Dashing in late, a society matron explains, ``I got tied up at a lunch for King Hussein.''

Nina and George are outsiders by virtue of their low-prestige jobs -- she's a social worker, he teaches first grade -- and the humor with which they view the incessant name-dropping. That's enough of a bond for Nina to invite George, whose boyfriend has just dumped him, to move into her unfashionable Brooklyn walk-up.

Nina soon finds she would much rather be with George than her overbearing lawyer-boyfriend, Vince (John Pankow). When she discovers she's pregnant by Vince, she wants George, not Vince, to be the live-in dad. ``We can make this up for ourselves,'' Nina tells George. ``None of the old rules apply.''

The rest of ``The Object of My Affection'' is about whether they really can flout convention in this way. It makes you think about what's important in a relationship. Is it sex, or is a wonderful friendship enough?

The smart script by Pulitzer-winning playwright Wendy Wasserstein (based on a novel by Stephen McCauley) doesn't supply an easy answer. Nina and George are made to suffer before their emotional dilemma is resolved. They are such enormously appealing characters you want things to work out.

Much of that appeal comes from compelling performances by the two main actors. Aniston, whose previous film work suggested she was more suited to TV, is a revelation. She's as perky as ever but brings a vulnerability and depth to her portrayal. Rudd (the stepbrother in ``Clueless'') wisely avoids playing George as stereotypically gay. He is such a subtle actor that he can make a cliche line like ``I'll be here for you'' believable. By bringing the right degree of pathos to poignant dialogue, he also has the capacity to make audiences cry.

The cast is a mix of TV and stage actors -- Aniston is on ``Friends,'' Pankow is a regular on ``Mad About You,'' Nigel Hawthorne, touching as an aging theater critic whose young lover becomes attracted to George, is a stalwart of the British stage. Credit should be given to director Nicholas Hytner for evening out the performances so the differences in technique aren't apparent.

``The Object of My Affection'' proves you don't need movie stars if you have a strong story and a lot of talent behind the camera. Of all the stage directors to try their hand at film, Hytner (``The Madness of King George,'' ``The Crucible'') has the best cinematic sense. He uses long shots of New York to establish a sense of place.

Wasserstein has a great ear for capturing the cadences of upper-echelon New Yorkers with all their puffed-up importance. It's personified in Alan Alda's character, supposedly the most famous book agent in the world, who goes from signing Fidel Castro to brunch at Norman Mailer's.