|Page 1 of 16:||          |
|Index||156 reviews in total|
For many the plot of this movie feels formulaic and revisited. Jane
(Katherine Heigl) is the people-pleaser of the century. A somewhat
spineless nice girl who can't say no to anyone, she has been a
bridesmaid 27 times, often exceeding her duties in every wedding. For
all her romantic yearnings, she can't seem to hook her boss, George (Ed
Burns) whom she has been in love with for years. When her self-centered
little sister Tess (Malin Akerman) comes in and manages to snag George,
Jane once again capitulates to everyone's needs but her own. In comes
Kevin (James Marsden), a newspaper columnist stuck covering weddings
who yearns to break out and write about more important things. Under
the pretense of covering George and Tess's wedding, he really is
writing about Jane and her perpetual bridesmaid stints. Complications
ensue etc. etc.
For me, what really made this movie was the performances. Katherine Heigl did an absolutely fantastic job playing the woman that I'm sure everyone has felt like at one time. She brought a lot of spice to what could have been a one-note role. James Marsden is also pitch-perfect as the cynical reporter, a foil to Jane. It helps that they have good fight-and-kiss chemistry.
Also, for me the story line was not as tired and recycled as people made it out to be. It had some fresh spin and I really enjoyed it. I also preferred the ending to this movie to many chick-flick comedies which leave things open-ended and almost unrealistic. 27 Dresses wraps up all the plot lines in one neat sequence that is a truly worthy finale.
All in all, as far as romances and rom-coms go, this one shot to the top of my list.
Romantic comedies are almost always predictable and follow similar story lines. I wasn't very keen on watching '27 Dresses'. Let's just say it's not my kind of film. But it turned out to be not too bad. While it does not exactly rank among the best of its genre, it has its own charm and that's one of the few things that make a romantic comedy likable. While the story isn't new, McKeena's writing offers some new devices and the dialogues are quite funny. Fletcher's storytelling is quite impressive too as he introduces the characters and then lets the events unfold. The layered characters Jane and Kevin are very real. I also like it when the leads are played by good actors who have hardly attempted to do films romantic comedies in the past and they manage to pull it off. Heigl and Marsden have the required chemistry. Both actors do a fine job. Katherine Heigl brings out the depth of her character with ease, while James Marsden is funny without going over-the-top. The sizzling Malin Akerman does well as the obnoxious Tess. Edward Burns's role doesn't require much but he's okay. Judy Greer is brilliant and she owns all her scenes. So what makes '27 Dresses' watchable is the chemistry between the actors, the funny lines, the presentation of the story, a nice soundtrack and its unique charm and sense of humour and the fact that it didn't bore me.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Pretty cute movie, pretty standard romcom premise, and Judy Greer is
worth a watch any time. Katherine Heigel is likable, Judy Greer smart
and funny, and James Marsden is charming, and everyone else
serviceable. But the sloppy story-telling and needless gimmickry took
away a lot of the fun. The story of the dresses was pretty amusing.
But....c'mon - Heigel as the sort of ugly duckling sister in love with a fantastic guy who is oblivious to her as anything other than his assistant? Hard to believe her in that role. And this 'great guy' of a boss of hers who has every wonderful quality a man can posses and then falls for the hot blonde chic (who happens to be his assistant's sister) as soon as he sees her? The plot did not follow the characters much. Also hard to see much chemistry between Heigel & Marsden - just no sparks that I could see.
And the ridiculous scene when Heigel realizes she loves Marsden and follows him onto a boat super-hero style and publicly declares her love? So pointless. He wasn't leaving the country...she could have just met him for dinner and talked with him. This over-the-top scene ruined any chance I had of any cinematic believability.
If you like cute, mostly mindless romcoms, this will not disappoint.
On Thursday, December 27, my friends and I went to the sneak preview of
"27 Dresses". At first, I wasn't excited to see it because I thought it
would be just another cheesy romantic comedy, "chick-flick" if you
will. I was wrong. "27 Dresses" was a romantic comedy everyone could
enjoy. That's right! I said EVERYONE (including guys).
Katherine Heigl is great in the film as Jane, the optimistic bridesmaid who wants a shot of love for herself someday and feels the the 27 bridesmaid dresses she keeps in her closet is a calling that its time for her to get a dress of a different kind.
Judy Greer, who's always "the best friend" in the movies, is very comical and sassy as Katherine's friend Casey. At least she knows what she wants, but she's very compassionate and supportive to Jane throughout the film.
One person, though, that I think stood out in this film, was James Marsden. I've always seen him in action movies ("X-Men" series and "Superman Returns) as a minor or supporting character, but I think that he made the male lead of Kevin his own. Although he gets on Jane's nerves half the time, he always tends to put on a smile on her face because she knows that he's trying to get her to let go of the past and move on to a possible future where her big day might come. Kevin's the guy you would want to confide in if something's troubling you or if you need to dance to an Elton John song to get your groove back.
If you should see any movie this new year, make a date with "27 Dresses". You'll be happy that you did.
When I saw the trailer for 27 Dresses, I was like "Oh, my God, not
again", typical plot, chick flick written all over it with over cheesy
dialog and unrealistic situations that sadly I can completely predict.
But thanks to the wonderful users of IMDb who gave this movie great
reviews. My friend begged me to go see this with her, so I figured
since she was treating and it was getting good reviews, it might be
worth a look, so we saw it today, and I think my friend hates me,
because I told her what would happen in the next scene and it would
happen. This romantic comedy genre, doesn't anyone realize that these
stupid plots are just recycled from one romantic comedy to the next?!
The only thing they do is a "twist", a wedding planner, a hotel maid, a
treasure hunter, blah, blah, blah. The actors couldn't even save this
Jane is a girl who has been in 27 weddings, she's so used to always putting others before herself. Her little sister, Tess, even steals her crush, George, and lies her way into making him love her. They get engaged and now Jane is once again the maid of honor, torture, huh? But guess what? There is a guy who surprisingly drives her insane, Kevin, a journalist who is writing an article on Tess and George and also secretly Jane's randevu's with her passion for "always a bride's maid, never a bride" routine. But of course they somehow fall for each other and break up when she finds out about the article, please tell me you get it from this point? Because you should if you've seen any other romantic comedy.
27 Dresses is a joke, I'm sorry, I know that's harsh, but these romantic comedies are very evil and manipulative in leading young girls onto what they think love is going to be or should be, or whatever. Sounds bitter, but do you honestly think that these movies are realistic or funny? It's so incredibly rare that we get a funny romantic comedy that is original and funny. Katherine Heigl is coming strong with her career, true, but I'm not impressed with her character choice. Jane's act on her little sister was a little too immature at the engagement party and she sunk to her sister's level, not to mention, why couldn't we have had just a regular, smart sister instead of a slut? It's just too common and predictable, seriously. The dialog "I get to have hot sex with random strangers and feel so much better"? Seriously, I'm just sick of romantic comedies, why aren't you? Trust me, this is not worth the look unless you fall for it each time.
I wasn't expecting much from this movie. I went to see it with a bunch of girlfriends not really thinking it would be anymore then your usual rom-com but I was very pleasantly surprised! Right from the start I could tell it would be something more than I had thought because the opening scenes had me laughing so hard -and thats saying something, because it takes a lot to make me laugh. The script was clever and witty and although sometimes certain aspects were predictable, you were always very engaged in the story and the characters. The acting was solid the entire film, I was already a huge fan of Katherine Heigl but after watching this and 'Enchanted' I am now also in love with James Marsden! The atmosphere in the cinema when i saw this movie was great, you could tell everyone was enjoying themselves. I enjoyed myself so much in fact, that I am going to watch the movie again tomorrow with my sister!
This film is about a woman who is madly in love with her boss, and
wants to get married. She has attended 27 weddings, but sadly none of
which her own.
"27 Dresses" is more pleasant than I thought it would be. I was worried that I would have to see 27 weddings in the film, but fortunately I did not. Normally, in a romantic comedy it does not require much acting, but Katherine Heigl manages to put in good acting to portray her jealousy towards her sister. Katherine Heigl is sweet and adorable, and she has a quality that makes the viewers connect to her.
Though the romance subplot is predictable, it story is saved by the rivalry and jealousy between sisters. This subplot is told in a tabloid way, which is fun and entertaining. The ending, which features a lot of dresses, is sweet and symbolically complete. "27 Dresses" provides adequate brain off entertainment for the family.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I didn't expect this movie to be thus thoroughly lacking in intellect. Katherine Heigl's character, Jane was meant to be portrayed as a witty and smart, warm-hearted girl-next-door type as opposed to her sister Tess, the hot but dumb blond. Sadly, both of them came across to me as just plain dumb, completely lacking the ability to construct a good sentence. The relationship between the sisters I thought mostly seemed to be ripped off(and not very well might I add) from the Rose(Toni Collette)-Maggie(Cameron Diaz) relationship in 'In Her Shoes'. Edward Burns's character, perhaps deliberately was so passive it made me wonder why anybody would fall for him. Heigl's acting is mostly good barring a few scenes in which she has the look of a person just recovered from a coma and her expressions are left to the audience's imagination. The dialog is ridiculous in parts but a few well written witticisms save the day(well, almost). Highly unrealistic at times, the writers have also contradicted themselves several times with displays of absurd anomalies in the behavior of some of the characters. And may I also say, that the word "cynical" has been used far more than necessary and quite often in the wrong context even. The only redemption factor in the movie is probably James Marsden. His acting is pretty good if not great and his character seems to be the only smart one in the entire movie, other than Jane's best friend Casie(played by Judy Greer) who was personally my favorite character and the only one with any substance. The story in itself is highly clichéd, the typical naive pushover falls in love with the incidentally highly handsome young lad who helps her through the struggle of learning to put her foot down. Too predictable. I'd have liked to watch a romantic comedy that isn't mindless and whose numerous shortcomings I'm not supposed to overlook just so i can enjoy that oh-so-heart-warming moment. Romance shouldn't need to be brainless, and its audience shouldn't be thus underestimated. Overall, I'd give the movie a 2 on 10.
Although this movie is a bit typical, it's still a breezy, light
hearted romp, which is all it appears to be trying to do. It's got
formulaic construction familiar in romantic comedies, yet it knows it's
just harmless fluff and doesn't try to be anything more.
Kathryn Heigl is certainly the strength of the film, with an exuberant approach to her "hopeless romantic" always the bridesmaid character who longs for that special day of her own. The performance is playful and silly when needed, and sweetly honest in the more serious moments. The rest of the cast are all good, too; the personality collisions of various characters are usually well done. The sight gags involving the dresses are clever, and the story runs its course effectively.
There are weaknesses, such as the ugly, mean spirited, and out-of-place slide show sequence. The script could have accomplished the point which is made there in some better way.
Light popcorn fun. Like fast food, it probably won't stick with you for long, but it's good for some entertaining silliness. One thing I'm still wondering: how much would scuba-gear set back the wedding party members?
So I was unlucky enough to catch this mess while on a 13-hour flight
from Shanghai to Chicago, along with Fool's Gold and Jumper. Remind me
never to fly United again. After the first hour I was ready to throw
myself out of the plane somewhere over the Arctic circle. I'm not sure
where exactly we were at that moment, but I looked out the window and
the ocean below was frozen, and landing on top of the ice after a
35,000-foot freefall sounded more appealing than another 45 minutes of
It's yet another bonehead romantic comedy about weddings, where the protagonist is always a bridesmaid but never a bride, etc etc etc. She's great at doing things for other people but not so great at going after what she really wants or needs for herself. She has a collection of bridesmaids dresses filling one closet in her apartment to capacity (no points for guessing how many she has), until one day her collection is witnessed by columnist Kevin Doyle, who sees this story about a wedding addict as his key to upward movement at his magazine.
Charged with coming up with something fresh and interesting, he shocks his editor (but not the audience) when he gets too involved in the story and realizes that maybe there's something more to it, since she, his editor, feels that it's probably just some throwaway garbage that no one is really going to pay much attention to anyway. Sadly, the people who made the movie never realized that that is true of the movie as well.
Anyway, Katherine Heigl stars as Jane Nichols, who attracted the attention of Kevin Doyle on a night when she was on a wedding marathon, shuttling between weddings at such at rate as to win the attention of the media. A lot of people complain about her performance, but I had no problem with her acting, or with James Marsden's, or really with anyone else in the cast. The problem is that the movie feels like a child's coloring book where someone just filled in the blanks and gave it a title and sent it to theaters. The formula here is so obvious that the laughs generated by its presence are the most effective part of the movie.
James Marsden plays the part of Kevin Doyle. This is a remarkably versatile actor. He is still best known, I should think, as Cyclops from the X-Men films, but has also turned in effective performances in romantic comedies, including his satisfactory performance as a Mr. Right in this idiot movie, as well as his role as Mr. Wrong in the indescribably superior film The Notebook. Kevin is a young professional with movie-star good looks and is impossibly charming, while Jane, unfortunately, doesn't notice or appreciate his charm because she is too deeply in love with her dirtbag of a boss George, played with effective repulsiveness by Edward Burns.
Later, Jane's little sister shows up, a bouncy, Barbie-ish blonde without a thought in her head who comes along and charms George off his feet, and we are asked to care when this jerk and this bimbo fall in love and ask Jane to plan their wedding.
Oh, that really pulls the heartstrings, doesn't it? These two shallow, superficial people getting together, leaving poor Jane with nothing but this stunningly handsome man with a good job and bright future constantly professing his true love to her. It is safe to say you can leave the tissue at home for this one.
I suppose I don't have to explain how obvious the conclusion of the movie is. Probably the most difficult thing that a good romantic comedy has to overcome is that they are all so predictable, except for the really good ones (The Notebook, as an example). In 27 Dresses, it is blatantly obvious from the first frame how the movie is going to turn out, except for the instant transformations that George and Tess, Jane's little sister, make in the last few minutes of the movie for the sake of the Hollywood ending.
Everyone involved in the movie has done much, much better than this. If you want to see James Marsden in something worth seeing, please check out The Notebook. Edward Burns has an extensive list of credits and has had some hits and misses (if, for example, you ever get a chance to see him in a movie called A Sound of Thunder, don't), and as for Katherine Heigl, she has done nothing but better films than this. Under Siege 2 is better than this, and that should really be all you need to know
|Page 1 of 16:||          |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|