27 Dresses

27 Dresses

Although the backdrop of this movie couldn't be more cliché-ridden: another wedding (or rather, a whole bunch of'em), in the "most wonderful city on earth," inhabited by "the most wonderful people on earth," - as if New York City were the epitome of paradise, instead of just another stinking, over-sized, overcrowded, over-prized and over-rated city, the story has a refreshing twist, and is one of the best in-depth character studies I've seen of late.

Especially those familiar with the Enneagram will be delighted to find the proto-type of a professional TWO, who is being thoroughly dissected by the man who dares to question everything she ever loved and stood for, but whom she also ultimately winds up together with - which, of course, is, where the realism stops again, but then, you never know...
 
Wrap the whole thing up in the well-flavored humor, pretty decent acting, and try to ignore the seen-it-a-thousand-times-before "N.Y. = Fairyland" backdrop, and you'll find yourself an actually thoroughly enjoyable film.

Recommendations: The Matrix , Fratello sole, sorella luna , The Visual Bible: The Gospel of John

There IS no spoon!

Last updated: 2010-03-13 06:12:10 by McDozer

27 Dresses

Romantic comedies are to men what science-fiction is to women: part mystery, part cautionary tale. Men do not “get” rom-coms because they are not aimed at men. A good rom-com is about sympathy, tears, good clothes and sisterhood. Like sci-fi, it offers enjoyment based on strict adherence to convention. There must be: a woman (age 25-35) who is torn between two prospective husbands; a best friend who is slightly less attractive than the lead; a sing-along scene; much falling over and a happy ending (in sci-fi you replace the humans with aliens and the sing-along with a space battle). 27 Dresses (if you follow this scheme) is The Wrath of Khan, with weddings.

Katherine Heigl plays an archetype called Jane. She works in a nice, plush office doing something-or-other. Jane is single, with a slightly less attractive best friend, a slightly more attractive younger sister and an unrequited love for her boss, the scumbag Ed Burns (he doesn’t play a scumbag, you understand; it’s Ed Burns who is, unquestionably, a scumbag). Jane likes going to weddings. At two ceremonies (held on the same night, each attended by Jane) she piques the interest of a handsome, cynical, Mr. Darcy-esque reporter (James Marsden), who decides to pursue her. At first Jane rebuffs the reporter’s advances, but gradually, amid social faux pas, misunderstandings, and much else that Jane Austen perfected, they fall in love.

There is, of course, nothing new here. But what makes a rom-com work or not work (and again, I point out the sci-fi parallel) is casting. Katherine Heigl has the rom-com heroine thingamajig down pat; the whole funny/sad/fall-over-but-retain-your-dignity bit comes naturally to her. She is neither too pretty nor not pretty enough. She can convince you that a man might overlook her and, equally, that a man might fall for her at first sight. Jennifer Aniston has spent the better part of ten years trying to get this right on screen, with only mixed results. But Heigl succeeds because (unlike Aniston) she looks like someone Jane Austen would have approved of. She has the Lizzy Bennet mix of common-sense, self-delusion, and female chumminess.

In the “hunk” role, James Marsden rocks. He’s on a role currently, and he seems to know it (though not in a smug way). As he did for his “hunk” role in Enchanted, Marsden takes a part that another actor would have spit on, and laps it up. Ever since he was killed in X-Men 3(he was killed, right? Does anyone remember what happened in that movie?) he’s been like a man re-born. He’s like Kevin Costner when Costner was released from playing heroes: footloose, horny, quick-witted… a woman-magnet. Just contrast Marsden with Burns (hide your eyes Burns fans); where Burns is doughy, torpid, doll-eyed, leaden… Marsden plays his scenes like a man drunk (but in a good way!). He’s got his shit-eating grin on and his inner-joy blasting. No-where does he succeed better (and this goes double for Heigl) than in the scene where he sings-along to Benny and the Jets. I love how a guy from the chorus comes up to Marsden and Heigl the day after. As a couple, they seem to inspire camaraderie.

27 Dresses isn’t exactly the 2001 of rom-coms. I don’t even know what the 2001 of rom-coms would look like (Eyes Wide Shut?), but damned if it ain’t enjoyable. You’d have to be a robot not to enjoy it at least a little bit. No, there’s nothing new in it. Hiegl and Marsden do not reinvent the wheel. No-one’s going to remember this movie years from now… unless it attains that capricious, sleep-over immortality of rom-coms like Overboard or Only You. It simply consoles, the way sci-fi consoles adolescent boys (and men who won’t grow up). It says to us: come here, see what you want to see, reserve judgement. Rom-coms and sci-fi are both about soothing nerves.

(Read Less...)

27 DRESSES (2007)

BACK COVER SYNOPSIS: Katherine Heigl (Knocked Up, TV's Grey's Anatomy) lights up the screen in this charming romantic comedy from the screenwriter of The Devil Wears Prada. Heigl stars as Jane, a romantic, completely selfless woman who's been a happy, helpful bridesmaid no less than 27 times. But her own fairy-tale wedding seems to be nowhere in sight, until younger sister Tess (Malin Akerman) captures the heart of Jane's boss (Edward Burns) - with whom she's secretly in love - inspiring Jane to change her "always a bridesmaid" destiny.

FILM REVIEW: A romantic comedy which has as its central premise a woman who is always the bridesmaid but never the bride might seem like a run-of-the-mill idea but there's something much more genuine and interesting about "27 dresses" that makes it rise up a little more than your stock-standard romantic comedy. Although it does indulge itself in the usual conventions associated with this genre (and its reliance on these conventions is disappointing and silly), this film actually has the guts to raise the theme of the difference between falling in love with the idea of getting married and falling in love with a person who is right for you. Not many romantic comedies do that because they're too busy selling the ultimate chick fantasy rather than making an attempt to present what happens in the real world. It's just a shame that in the end "27 dresses" does the same thing, but before we get to that point, this film actually has something to say through some warm characters and charming scenes, making for a film that holds your interest in the middle, but ultimately loses it at the end with its highly predictable ending.
From when she was a young girl, Jane has been helping other women with their weddings. After an opening setup where we see her help a young girl with her distraught father at a wedding, we flash forward to the present where we see Jane frantically moving between two weddings on one night. This catches the attention of Kevin Doyle (James Marsden), a writer who works for a column called "Commitments" who writes romantic articles about the weddings he attends despite the fact that he despises the whole concept. Inevitably, the two come together and trade blows over their differing views on weddings and marriage. Making matters worse is that Jane doesn't realise that Kevin is the writer of the "Commitments" column which she reads with a dedicated passion.
On the side, Jane is madly in love with her boss George (Edward Burns), a fact that gets Kevin even more interested in her from a story angle: what's better? A bridesmaid who is organising her sister's wedding when she's madly in love with the groom. Kevin for his part tries to convince Jane that she should be looking out for herself and to open her eyes to the real world, not to the sugary sweet idea she's living in of a dream wedding with her boss. As is turns out, when Jane finally confronts reality and admits to George she's in love with him, and they exchange a kiss, she feels nothing; and as she discovers, it shouldn't feel like that. This is perhaps the most interesting idea working through the film: there's the idea of what you want, and then there's the reality. And as Jane discovers, what she thought she wanted wasn't what she actually wanted at all, a lesson that so many people I'm sure have learned who have gone through relationships and marriages where it was based on the "idea" of what they wanted rather than reality. What works even further is the idea that she ends up with Kevin, a man who is diametrically opposite to what she wants but in the end is the one who engages her mind and emotions through his wit, charm and intelligent sarcasm.
There's a lot going on in this movie thematically to hold your interest. First, there's the sibling rivalry between Jane and Tess, the latter of which always gets the light and attention. Jane never argues the point and lets Tess get away with everything, including Tess' romantic interest in her boss which sets up a number of great scenes with Jane hovering in the background looking like she's under the most intense mental torture she's every likely to be under given she's in love with her boss. It's only when Tess is selfish enough to cut up her mother's wedding dress to make a new one that Jane finally snaps, telling George the truth and in dramatic fashion exposes Tess' lies to keep George in front of everyone at their "night-before-the-wedding-day" party. There's also a lot of "wedding" commentary which is manifested in Kevin's character which is fun to watch, especially when it is so opposed to Jane's sweet and innocent views on weddings and marriage.
Where this film falls down is its reliance on typical romantic comedy conventions. Single-handedly, the climax really kills the film. You know that it should end happily because films like this have to end this way, but there's something very arbitrary and contrite about the proceedings as presented. Things just wrap up very quickly; Jane's feelings for her boss are glossed over in one scene, Kevin is re-introduced to take his place as Jane's man and future husband, Jane and Tess make up, and before you know it, they're all on a beach watching Jane and Kevin get married at a beautiful beach wedding. It's quite rapid and marks a major detour from the middle of the film which had some interesting sequences. But what did it for me in the end was the line up of women whom Jane helped dressed in the bridesmaid dresses that Jane wore at their weddings. It's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen. Given so much of this film actually explored interesting thematic territory, this 2-D cop out of an ending is a major let down.
"27 Dresses" is a romantic comedy that is more genuine and real than most films of its type; its unfortunately let down in the end by those very conventions which define films of its type.

TECHNICAL REVIEW: The video transfer is spot on, containing no artefacts, grain or blemishes. The colours look particularly good, especially with all the wedding and bridesmaid fashion on display, rendered in glorious details in the images. The audio transfer is likewise very good, although the surrounds weren't used to total effect, but then this isn't the type of movie to use surrounds. Overall, this is a great transfer.

EXTRAS REVIEW: There are a handful of featurettes which make up the documentary material on this DVD. They total around 25 minutes of screen time, and cover the making of the film with cast and crew interviews, the production design and of course, a featurette on the costumes. There's a bit of self-indulgence on the part of those being interviewed, thinking they'd made something very special and unique (which is partly true), but for the most part these featurettes are quite a good complement to the film. However, the most interesting featurette covered a major wedding dress sale in the US which is held only once a year; seeing hordes of women grab wedding dresses at breakneck speed was quite a fascinating sight. All the dresses disappeared in 30 seconds! But then again, the girls were enjoying savings of up to 90% off. Can't beat that. In addition to these featurettes there are three deleted scenes. Overall, it's a nice collection, but not overtly comprehensive. They could have had more.

BOTTOM LINE: Rent it.

FILM RATING: 7/10 -- EXTRAS RATING: 7/10 -- OVERALL DVD RATING: 7/10 

Todd Murphy <br />
http://www.allaboutmovies.net

Last updated: 2010-02-08 21:04:43 by user01

27 Dresses

I’m not very well versed n weddings or anything that has to do with them, but I don’t something just isn’t right about a woman who’s been a bridesmaid 27 times (and kept the dresses), but never even came close to being the bride. It takes that old saying, “Always a bridesmaid, never a bride,” to heart.
Katherine Heigl is said woman who has been the bridesmaid 27 times and is a bit of a doormat. In typical chick flick fashion, though, she gets pissed off at James Marsden’s article and changes her life. Heigl is deceptively funny is what would otherwise be a rather drab movie, especially in scenes with Marsden. She also plays the vulnerable woman in a way that would make the queen of romantic comedies, Meg Ryan, proud.
James Marsden seems to fit these kind of roles perfectly. He has natural comedic and acting talents, plus he has the look of a normal guy, as opposed to some kind of hearthrob. Having said all that, though, this is not my favorite performance of his. Its not necessarily bad, I just think he’s done, and can do, better.
Malin Akerman has a line in the film where she says laments being called a “bridezilla”. Funny thing is, all the reasons she gives for not being one are the exact reasons she was called one. Akerman is brilliantly cast as the younger sister. Throughout most of the film, it is obvious to the audience that she is the, for lack of a better term, spoiled, privelaged sister. That is, until big sister Jane, growns some balls and ruins her at the most inopportune moment. This leads to the revelation that her life isn’t so perfect after all. Akerman’s emotion seem so real and genuine, that you go from detesting her to actually feeling sorry for her.
Judy Greer and Edward Burns play strong supporting roles. Judy is Jane’s best friend and, I believe, if they would have given her better material, could have really stole the show, but it seemed like they were holding her back. Burns is Jane’s boss and Tess’ fiancee. There are no negative qualities about the guy, character-wise or in terms of his acting.
The trailers for this film made me believe there was going to be a lot more comedy. Instead, it turns out that there were only 1 or 2 laugh out loud hysterical moments, the rest of the time is subtle humor and typical chick flick drama. I guess I shouldn’t really have expected more from a film whose subject matter is a bunch of bridesmaid dresses. Still, it didn’t suck.
Would I bend over backwards to se this again? No, but remember, I am a guy, so you should have guessed that. I see this as one of those “girls night” flicks, but you have to make your own opinion.

http://thankyounetflix.wordpress.com

(Read Less...)