Two women at different rungs on the corporate ladder meet on a business trip and then proceed to bore you to death.
This movie is supposed to be a study in control. Julia Stiles (the ivy-league brat and aspiring writer forced to work an IT job in order to pay the bills) manipulates Stockard Channing (the community college grad and devoted career woman recently promoted to CEO of her company) into taking part in what we are supposed to believe is some revenge scheme against a man who sexually assaulted Stiles' friend.
Except that through the course of this tedious film, we discover that it was really Stiles who was assaulted...no, wait: actually, it turns out that Stiles doesn't even know this guy.
How ironic. How curious that after the whole ordeal (which eventually turns criminal), Stockard Channing seems amused that she has been so cleverly manipulated. How totally ingenious.
Except that we never really get to know Stiles' character. We do get some insight into Channing's fiercely-determined, staggeringly-insecure CEO, but none into the "enigmatic" malcontent who is the movie's protagonist.
Sure, not everything in life can be neatly tied up in two hours, but not everything in life deserves to be put on cellulose either. This was just a bad film.
At some point I will learn to decode the critics' reviews in order to identify these stinkers before I watch them. This particular offering was, according to one IMDB reviewer, filmed in just 23 days. Maybe they should have taken a little longer. More than a study in control, this movie is a study in what people will swallow as art.
I give it a 2, because Stockard Channing does a reasonable job with her role.
This movie is supposed to be a study in control. Julia Stiles (the ivy-league brat and aspiring writer forced to work an IT job in order to pay the bills) manipulates Stockard Channing (the community college grad and devoted career woman recently promoted to CEO of her company) into taking part in what we are supposed to believe is some revenge scheme against a man who sexually assaulted Stiles' friend.
Except that through the course of this tedious film, we discover that it was really Stiles who was assaulted...no, wait: actually, it turns out that Stiles doesn't even know this guy.
How ironic. How curious that after the whole ordeal (which eventually turns criminal), Stockard Channing seems amused that she has been so cleverly manipulated. How totally ingenious.
Except that we never really get to know Stiles' character. We do get some insight into Channing's fiercely-determined, staggeringly-insecure CEO, but none into the "enigmatic" malcontent who is the movie's protagonist.
Sure, not everything in life can be neatly tied up in two hours, but not everything in life deserves to be put on cellulose either. This was just a bad film.
At some point I will learn to decode the critics' reviews in order to identify these stinkers before I watch them. This particular offering was, according to one IMDB reviewer, filmed in just 23 days. Maybe they should have taken a little longer. More than a study in control, this movie is a study in what people will swallow as art.
I give it a 2, because Stockard Channing does a reasonable job with her role.