|Page 1 of 14:||          |
|Index||135 reviews in total|
82 out of 128 people found the following review useful:
How can this be any worse?, 28 June 2011
Author: Frank van 't Veer from Netherlands
If you think cheating is awesome, this is the movie for you.
Everyone cheats and everyone ends up happily.
Every little bit of it is predictable too, nothing about it is fun or unique.
There is no moral in this story, there is nothing funny. It's just a bunch of pretty guys and girls cheating on each other without repercussions.
I'm thinking really hard right now about whether anything about it was good, but I can't think of anything...
And why does everyone in these romantic comedies have to be upper-class and from good heritage?
And why is it always set in NYC?
There's really nothing original about this one.
Do not waste 1.5 hours of your life on this!
70 out of 117 people found the following review useful:
Where Did Everyone Get Their Money?, 9 May 2011
Author: james shoop from Passaic, NJ
Let's see! Weekly trips to a beach front house in the Hamptons.
Beautiful brownstone apartments in the City. Driving around in a Land
Rover. Taking trips to London.
All of these things happened in the movie and yet, for only 2-3 scenes do we see anyone at work. Everyone has all of this free time and no one says where the money comes from.
Well I got that off my che$t and I feel better.
As for the movie--someone said it best. It was a tennis match of watching relationships change back and forth. Yes, John Krasinksi was very good, however, I was expecting Pam Beasly to show up. He was playing his Office character in this movie and yes he made it bearable.
My wife loved the movie and I constantly squirmed in my seat. Wish I could write more but I have to work for a living.
25 out of 31 people found the following review useful:
incredibly disgusted by this movie, 9 November 2011
Author: mnasidica from florida
I watched this because I've always been a fan of GG. I think she's
pretty in a less conventional way, but definitely prettier than Kate
Which brings me to one point. This movie was one of those ugly duckling movies without the ugly duckling. Rachel (GG) admits that she "never thought a guy like you would end up with someone like me..." as if she has three heads or a skin condition or something equally appalling. She has none of these things. She's pretty, she has a good career, and the only major personality flaw she has is the inability to be proactive (which shouldn't be a problem since her love interest is the EXACT SAME WAY). Yeah. This is a terrible movie with absolutely no action in it until the very end. We don't even get to see the scene where Darcy is dumped.
Adding to the incredible coincidence that neither Rachel nor Dex know what to do in this incredibly obvious situation (we know Dex has some mommy issues, but that wasn't really explained... I can't remember anything his mother said or did, aside from a few woeful looks). The only person we hear any reason from is Ethan, and by then we all want to smack some sense into the main characters.
What bothers me incredibly about this movie is that it basically drives loyalty between "best friends" straight into the ground. Not only does Rachel sleep with her best friend's fiancé, she doesn't TELL her best friend her mistake, she sleeps with Dex again, encourages Darcy to marry this guy who is cheating on her and doesn't love her, and then contemplates telling Dex that Darcy cheated on HIM. Who is getting majorly screwed over here? In all the mixup and emo WHAT DO WE DO action (or lack thereof), it's easy to forget who is being hurt the most.
Uh oh. The script writers went a little too far...
IN COMES...villainizing! It's a common trick in cinema to demonize characters so that we stay rooting for the main character. This was very overdone in this movie. At first Darcy had a few good traits that you could see, but it wasn't long before she become entirely RIDICULOUS as a character. By the end of the movie, we discover that she's also been cheating on Dex this WHOLE TIME...AND...she's pregnant. She had to do something a bit worse in order for us to forgive Rachel. In doing so, the depth of Darcy was lost - and everyone has depth, let's not fool ourselves. Obviously the movie wasn't about her, it was about Rachel, but it sends the message that it's okay to screw your best friend over as long as she's doing it too - and when does that actually happen? It also sends the message that it's okay to wait on a man to leave his fiancé and to not give up too soon, because he might have a REALLY GOOD REASON. Wrong. If a man isn't leaving his wife, he's not going to, so you just better move on. Those are the cold, hard facts. AND, if a man is cheating on his fiancé/wife/girlfriend with you, he's going to do the exact same thing once your relationship with him gets a little rocky (that is, if you ever make it to a relationship). But seriously - once a cheater, always a character. Obviously his morals are not fantastic. If he loves you, he'll leave her, if he doesn't, don't bother waiting around. You deserve better.
Ethan was the only character that seemed to agree with this philosophy. I really wanted the movie to end with Rachel going off with someone else, someone who knew what to do from the beginning and didn't stand weakly by and take forever to figure out that love is more important than his father's glare.
I hated the weakness of these characters. I hated the message. I hated the necessity of making Darcy's character unbearable so that we won't end up despising the main characters for their despicable actions. What's worse is that no one was punished for the horrible betrayal that took place in this movie - they were rewarded.
31 out of 44 people found the following review useful:
So morally conflicting!, 6 May 2011
Author: Pocket_boy from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I went in to this movie expecting a fun light-hearted funny romantic
comedy. Boy was i wrong! It started out on an okay note with a tacky
surprise party for Rachel (Goodwin) thrown by her life-long best friend
Darcy (Hudson), and did i mention life long? We'll come back to that.
well no more then ten minutes later Rachel has slept with Dex
(Egglesfield) Darcy's fiancé. Now let me remind you that Rachel and
Darcy have been best friends since early childhood.
The rest of the movie is tennis game of rationalization and guilt with a few smatterings of clever witty one liners. and in the end Darcy and Rachel's relation ship is completely ruined and Rachel and Dex live happily ever after. In the final scene after Dacry has discovered the affair and not seen Rachel for two months they meet on a city street, and you think that maybe there is going to be some kind of redemption, but Darcy says to Rachel "I bought him that shirt" and you notice the dry cleaning held over Rachel's shoulder, a few more words are traded about how Darcy is truly happy now, and Rachel goes into the arms of Dex.
The movie was a rationalization for sleeping with your best friends fiancé, and forbidden love prevailing. I was very disappointed this movie, purely on content, acting was pretty good otherwise....
29 out of 41 people found the following review useful:
Something Blew., 5 May 2011
Author: Anna S. from Brooklyn, NY
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
What an insufferable piece of garbage this was. Giffin's book is more
nuanced, giving the characters in this story a complexity that makes
them somewhat likable. The movie fails with this, and in all regards.
Virtually every person who graces the screen in this film is
detestable. Each is worse than the last. There's no one to root for
There is only one way this movie could have been redeemed: if the Hamptons house these losers shared was torpedoed (with the cast inside) in the final scene. That's how difficult it was to endure this long, tiresome, insulting rom-com.
If I could subtract points for SOBO's misguided inaccurate and one dimensional depiction of New York City as a yuppie transplant's playground (dutifully carried over from the novel) I would. And if I could subtract points for the rampant and blatant product placement permeating this horrific film I would. But I can't, I've already given this movie the lowest possible rating.
20 out of 24 people found the following review useful:
A Simply Unbearable Group of People, 7 August 2011
Author: Anthony Pittore III (Shattered_Wake) from Los Angeles, CA
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
'Something Borrowed' is based on the novel of the same name by Emily
Griffin which I've never heard of. It concerns a group of
thirtysomethings as they struggle through a love rectangle or trapezoid
or whatever shape is made up by Kate Hudson ('How to Lose a Guy in 10
Days'), Ginnifer Goodwin ('Big Love'), John Krasinski ('The Office'),
and the unfortunately named Colin Egglesfield ('Melrose Place'). It's
also occasionally a love pentagon or hexagon if you count Ashley
Williams & Steve Howey. As are typical in stories about differently
shaped loves, there's lots of betrayal amongst friends, panicking of
unfaithfuls, heartfelt conversations covered in rain, and unnecessary
stupidity of everyone involved. . . but, that last bit is expected in
any romance, cinematic or real.
One major problem with a film about infidelity is that it's impossible to really like anyone involved with the scandal. Here, we only have the Rachel, the woman who betrays her friend (Goodwin); Dex, the fiancé who betrays his love (Egglesfield); and, Darcy, the woman betrayed by both (Hudson). Typically, you can associate with those cheated on solely through sympathy, but that was made difficult for two reasons: 1) Darcy's a secondary character who seems to always act like that girl who always gets too drunk at college parties; and, 2) The movie constantly acts as if it's going to reveal something negative about her past (spoiler: it does). Granted, no one deserves to be hurt this way for being annoying, but she's still not an enjoyable character to watch. Maybe things would be different if Darcy and Rachel's roles were swapped, but we all know of hindsight's perfection. Left alone behind all this despicable behaviour is the typical nice guy Ethan (Krasinski) who, along only with Dex's dad, acts as a voice of reason in the film. Unfortunately, he's like an umbrella in a hurricane, unable to rescue this mess of humanity from themselves.
Now, I suppose this is a film that's not meant to be enjoyed on the level of a typical romantic comedy; but, with this cast and a sugary, generic title like 'Something Borrowed,' a viewer should not be forced to withstand the cringe-inducing behaviour like that of Dex & Rachel. Never have I so wanted the leads of a romance to be hit by a New York cabbie. Then again, I also wished that fate upon myself for a while to alleviate the misery of watching these monsters. Clearly, writer Jennie Snyder & director Luke Greenfield, who have both successfully worked in romance before this film, have talent that should carry them through their futures, but a film this unlikable was not their best step forward to that future. A romance hasn't been this depressing since last year's 'Blue Valentine,' but at least that film succeeded because of its sad nature and didn't have to battle against it.
Final Verdict: 4/10.
55 out of 96 people found the following review useful:
Very great adaption!!!, 1 March 2011
I've been able to watch a test screening of the movie in early February
during the Berlin Film Festival in Berlin, Germany.
I've been a big fan of the book(s), so I was really looking forward to how they adapted "Something Borrowed". First of all, the actors were great. I didn't expect it at first, but Ginnifer and Colin were just perfect as Rachel and Dex. They did such an amazing job and I was sitting in the cinema with a pounding heart the whole time. Kate and John were hilarious, but I didn't expect any less and just because of those two, I really hope they'll adapt "Something Blue" (the sequel to "Something Borrowed") as well.
I've read the book a couple of years ago, so I don't remember every detail of it, but I don't think they left any major facts out. It's a great chick-flick. I'm not sure if guys will enjoy it much, but it's a great movie to watch with your girlfriends/mother/sisters, etc.
15 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
Written by someone who doesn't understand human decency, 28 May 2011
Author: geekgirl-66-635322 from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This movie (which I only just discovered is based on a book) was
clearly written from the POV of someone who has never been betrayed,
never been hurt by a trusted friend and/or lover, someone who thinks
you should do what feels good, without any consequences.
I don't need to reiterate the whole storyline, as that has been done in previous reviews, but let's look at a few key points. Rachel loved Dex in college. Dex may have had feelings in return, but as soon as the beautiful, vivacious Darcy shows up, he's like "bye-bye"to Rachel with nary a backward glance. Considering Darcy and Rachel are longtime best friends, we know Rachel and Dex have seen one another many times in the ensuing years, and yet it isn't until Rachel's birthday that they suddenly realize they really love each other? Come on! Ridiculous.
Rachel and Dex sleep together. Okay, I can buy making a mistake, even at the cost of hurting a friend. But then, a normal person, who's as sympathetic as we're told Rachel is, would certainly back off and make it right, not continue down the path that will destroy her friend.
Finally, Rachel realizes she loves Darcy, and can't hurt her, after offering herself (stupidly) to the cowardly, cheating pig Dex. She goes to London, and is told by her male best friend Ethan that he loves her, that she is "home" to him. Who wouldn't at least give a guy like that a chance? And lets keep in mind that he's the only person who has always been honest with her, unlike the rest of her "friends".
So what does she do? Leaves London, and when Dex shows up to tell her he called the wedding off, jumps into his arms. Really? So she learned NOTHING during the whole drama? At the end, when she runs into Darcy, we don't get the resolution needed between them, and when her phone rings, I just knew it was Ethan. Then she rounds the corner, and it's...Dex??? Just how brainless is this woman? I'm pretty sure a guy who cheated on his fiancé with her best friend will be loyal and true to Rachel. That's realistic, right? If you have even the vaguest of morals, or the slightest conscience, avoid this travesty. Seriously. Up until the ending, I actually enjoyed the movie pretty well, because I kept hoping for her to learn and grow. Instead, she took a huge leap backwards. Any sympathy I had garnered for her during her dilemma dissipated faster than mist in the desert.
As for the acting, John Kraszinski stole the movie. Charming and charismatic, his was the only character at the end I still liked. Ginnifer Goodwin was fantastic in the role (not her fault the storyline is idiotic). Kate Hudson is annoying and almost unwatchable, nothing much there to relate to, until her last two scenes (discovering Dex's jacket, and seeing Rachel on the street). In those, the is immensely watchable, luminous and sympathetic. Colin Egglesfield is beautiful, though a bit stiff, and perfect to play the part of the swine Dex. Steve Howey and Ashley Williams as Marcus and Claire are hilarious, and though they didn't fit in with the drama of the movie, they were the only things slightly resembling the "com" part of romcom that this is being touted as.
Just a side note, I went with my mom (age 70), my daughter (age 16) and myself (age 43) and we ALL agreed about this movie.
27 out of 43 people found the following review useful:
Close. But no dice., 22 May 2011
Author: Huda Idrees from Canada
I don't mind chick flicks. I don't love them, but I also don't mind them. They're often light- hearted and make for a good evening out. However, I also don't like it when a relatively good story with strong potential is wasted by making it into a bad movie. The book wasn't great, I'll give you that. But the movie was worse. Kate Hudson was too over the top as Darcy (and blonde) and overall, the movie tried too hard to fit in all the ingredients of a "standard" chick flick: The great, good-looking amazing guy. The clumsy, not-so-obviously great looking girl whom everyone loves. The sympathetic, funny, sense-making friend. The gregarious, loud-mouthed party girl. The one who always gets left behind and of course, the gross-but-somehow-gets- the-girl through cheesy lines guy. They could've done so much better than that. It was a very unglamorous movie made from a very glamorous book. What a waste. That said, Ethan was absolutely adorable in this movie! His dialog was nice and he was spot on with his character. Bravo! Goodwin (Rachel) needs to stop taking these kinda roles. She is going to get completely branded.
31 out of 57 people found the following review useful:
Good girly fun, entertaining, 9 May 2011
Author: msbroberts from CA
After reading some negative reviews in some magazine I went to the
movie with trepidation. Is it a finely crafted film, with a riveting
script? No, but it was a good way to enjoy a Sunday afternoon with a
Kate Hudson, Gennifer Goodwin do a good job making the friendship believable and warm, which could have been difficult considering their different temperaments. Colin Egglesfield is so handsome and those eyes can make you forgive a someway stiff performance. John Krasinski steals the show though, with his spot on delivery of the best lines in the movie.
Be sure to stay until after the credits for a little bonus blip.
Hoping they do the next story, John Krasinski would be fabulous.
|Page 1 of 14:||          |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|