Reviews written by registered user
gwynjones2001

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
11 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Long & Unfunny, 31 January 2015
4/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Google were jealous of Facebook and The Social Network. So now we have The Internship which is Google, Google, Google, but without the story, insight, wit, acting, relevance, or plausibility of The Social Network.

I loved Wedding Crashers so it's good to see Vince Vaughan and Owen Wilson together again, and, of course, they do manage a few jokes. But, overall, it's a disappointing, implausible and largely-unfunny 2-hour infomercial for Google, its fabulous Googleplex HQ, and its ubiquitous products.

If that appeals, then, hey, knock yerself out... but don't say I didn't warn ya.

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
slow, 5 June 2011
6/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Here's my theory: George Clooney has a fancy house in Italy, and a hot Italian girlfriend... so he figures he owes Italy big time... and now's as good a time as any to do the Italian Tourist Board a favor. And he knows Anton Corbijn, who has done some directing, but really is a professional photographer, who likes to make stuff look good. So, together, they craft an hour and a half (the other half an hour is in Sweden) pictorial of beautiful Italian countryside, and quaint Italian hillside villages.

So, if you were an international hit-man who needs to lay low, would you hide out in a big city, and blend into the crowd... or find a tiny Italian hillside village with a population of 73, where you stick out like a sore thumb? Luckily, for the Italian Tourist Board, George thinks the latter.

Maybe he got paid? After all, it's really just product placement, and I think Woody Allen has done this for Barcelona and Paris and London, so it's not exactly a radical concept.

Certainly money well spent by the Italian Tourist Board. It all looked beautiful, and I spent most of the movie thinking: I really must go have a trip to Italy. (Sweden looked beautiful too. But cold. I think I'll give it a miss.) George stays in some tiny little house in this tiny little village... where you and me and every other normal person would be bored senseless after a day, tops, and need to go running back to the big city.

Luckily, for George, there's a brothel... with a really hot girl. Wow, did I spot a hooker with a heart of gold? Will the cold-hearted international hit-man fall in love with her? Don't ask: do hot girls who want to be hookers go to big cities with lots of potential customers, or remote Italian hillside villages with population of 73? Then there's the final job. Some kind of custom gun making task. Another reviewer, who knows his guns, has explained what George was making, and why he shouldn't have bothered. I don't know guns, but I know remote Italian hillside villages and their quaint little houses, so I know that George has no damn tools in his pad. How the hell is he gonna make (or modify) a gun? Of course, he'll go to the local car mechanic, and borrow a few spare car parts, and a couple of spanners, and improvise! Duh! At the end, he sabotages the gun that he so carefully modifies, so that the mystery girl won't be able to shoot him with it. She shoots him. It blows up. She's shown with her eye shot out. Even if George sabotages the gun, there's is no way the bullet can come back via the telescopic sight that she's looking through. But sure, she'd be dead, I can't argue with that.

Some other people die too.

But there's about 5 minutes of people dying, the rest of the time not very much happens at all. Look: it's a beautiful Italian hillside village! Look: it's wonderful Italian countryside! Look: a glorious mist-shrouded Italian dawn! Look: a beautiful pair of (real, not like those plastic American ones) Italian breasts! Look: George is having a famous Italian coffee! Look: George is having a famous Italian pizza! (Not really, I made that one up.) Look: George is going down on the beautiful Italian hooker... and giving her an orgasm. It must be real! You can see her falling in love! That's all it takes in Italy! Look: it's a famous Italian Catholic Priest, he wants George to confess his sins! Look: quaint cobbled streets of quaint Italian hillside villages! In other words: it's slow, slow, slow. Very existential. George is figuring out his career options (what does a retired international hit-man do?), and how to deal with women (he either kills them, or falls in love with them, is there a middle path?).

But Clooney is a handsome guy. And Italy is beautiful. And, however implausibly, there are three pretty girls who find their way into the movie. Overall, slow, but not without redeeming qualities... and I didn't fall asleep.

As an action / killing people movie, it's about 2/10. As a romance, it's 3/10. As an introspective discourse on the meaning of life, it's a 4/10. As a love-letter to Italy, it's a 9/10 (make that 8/10, I can't believe they didn't have George eating a pizza).

Hall Pass (2011)
9 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
a romantic comedy... with little in the way of romance or comedy, 19 April 2011
3/10

6.1? IMDb, you must be kiddin' me!

I dropped off my motorcycle to get the tyre changed, and they said come back in 2 and a half hours. So I walked to the mall, and grabbed a ticket for the movie starting right now. Which was, of course, Hall Pass. As a method of picking movies, I suggest you avoid this.

As for the movie, I wished I'd walked home instead. Or walked around the mall ogling shop assistants. Or sat at a cafe and drank 6 coffees. Or stayed at the motorcycle shop and watched the mechanic change the tyre. Probably all these options would have been better.

The plot is stupid, but I'm too fed up to try to summarize it.

Instead, let me say that the movie is only just over 1 and a half hours long. And it seemed too long. And I barely laughed all the way through, and probably not at all for the first hour or so. I can't remember what I found amusing, but I know it was a mild titter rather than a heartfelt guffaw of merriment.

As for the two couples, they didn't have much chemistry, and precious little romance.

Something About Mary was the high water mark of the Farrelly brothers oeuvre. I haven't seen all their other masterpieces, but I'm guessing that Hall Pass is somewhere around the low water mark... and the tide's way out. SAM was really, really funny. HP isn't. SAM had some outrageous gross-out humor. HP doesn't. It has a few lame attempts, but they fail miserably. SAM even had a bit of romance, and probably qualified as a romantic comedy. HP has almost zero romance, and very little comedy. It's a romantic comedy without either romance or comedy.

It's a joke-free end to the Farrelly Brothers' long and illustrious career. Don't let the door slam on ya, on the way out boys. Don't pay real money to see this movie. There are many other fine ways of spending that money, which will result in more laughter and pleasure than Hall Pass.

Oh, while I'm carping, two Office regulars (Jenna Fischer, USA version and Stephen Merchant, UK version) totally wasted. Owen Wilson looked really old.

PS I paid $4.50 for my ticket. And that was $4.50 too much.

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
ridiculous plot... but very funny, and surprisingly heart-warming, 16 April 2011
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The plot is utterly ridiculous, but I'll try to summarize anyway, just for giggles: A successful plastic surgeon (Sandler) is a horndog who wears a wedding ring because it helps him score with chicks. But then he meets a Cute Young Chick (Decker) who he wants to have a relationship with... but she finds the ring in his pants, and goes nuts because she won't date married men. So the Good Doctor makes up a marriage (to his Kind Assistant, played by Anniston) and impending divorce (because of her infidelity with Dolph Lundgren, but not THAT Dolph Lundgren). And Cute Young Chick now wants to meet the (soon to be ex) wife, just so she can check he's really telling the truth. It happens all the time, I'm sure.

Now, if you can believe this (it's Anniston, after all), Kind Assistant is a Plain Jane, so now the Good Doctor has to take her for an Extreme Makeover, so she can look like a well-maintained Hollywood Wife. Then the two girls meet, it goes great... but, at the end of the evening, Kind Assistant gets a call from her kids, and forgets the role play. So, now, Cute Young Chick thinks the Good Doctor has kids... and now she wants to meet THEM, to see if he's a good father.

The Crazy Kids extort the Good Doctor in return for pretending to be his children, and get a bunch of acting classes, video games, food... and a family trip to Hawaii to swim with the dolphins. If you've stayed with me so far, you can picture the sunshine and beaches of Hawaii, with the Good Doctor, his would-be girlfriend the Cute Young Chick, his fake wife, the fake wife's fake boyfriend, the fake Dolph Lundgren. And, of course, the fake wife's real kids, posing as the Good Doctor's fake kids.

To add to the fake-ness, Nicole Kidman and Dave Mathews show up as a third couple, Kidman being the hyper-competitive bitchy high school friend of Anniston's, who's a pretentious fake. And Mathews as her boyfriend and inventor of the iPod. He's fake too, because he's not the inventor of the iPod, and he's gay, so not much use on the boyfriend front. Now, Kind Assistant is playing awful about-to-be ex-wife of Good Doctor around Cute Young Chick... but is forced to play real Kind Assistant around Kidman and Mathews... with wonderful marriage to hugely successful Good Doctor, as a bit of relationship one-upmanship.

Maybe it's better if you think of it as a farce.

While there, Good Doctor realizes that Crazy Kids and Kind Assistant are the ones he loves, rather than Cute Young Chick. I bet you didn't see that one coming.

The kids are great, a deadpan boy (Griffin Gluck), and an aspiring actress girl (Bailee Madison), putting on a Mary Poppins English accent, with extra helping of Dick van Dyke. Luckily, they have some very nice awwww, ain't kids adorable moments.

Anniston does a really great job of being kind and lovable. Dolph Lundgren (Nick Swardson, a Sandler regular) is a hoot as Anniston's fake boyfriend, with some kind of Schwarzenneger-ish German-ish accent, as a dot-com sheep entrepreneur. Brooklyn Decker just has to be cute and sweet, and she does a pretty good job for a model. And, given that she's an SI cover girl, she did well at being cute, but not too smoking hot to be involved in all these shenanigans.

And Sandler ties it all together, with the usual Sandler shtick. But better than usual, and much more genuine. He's a bit more grown-up, and a bit more toned-down, than most of his roles.

The Sandler/Anniston connection is very sweet and believable, and it's what carries the film. Overall, I think this is one of the best things I've seen both Anniston and Sandler do. It was a thoroughly engaging and enjoyable couple of hours. It's a great date movie with lots of sweetness and romance, with a bit of Sandleresque stupid stuff going on to keep the guys distracted.

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
bizarre... but cute, 9 April 2011
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I never heard of this movie, I guess it didn't make it into mainstream distribution. I just caught it on a movie channel today, by accident.

Little Miss Sunshine was quirky and offbeat, but in a way that doesn't seem too outrageous. I think it's harder to warm to a movie about the everyday tale of a mortician, the bulimic beauty queen, and the mortician's disabled father. It's probably just me, but I was distracted by the disabled father, thinking: I hope Joe Mantegna's taken the advice of Robert Downey Jr in Tropic Thunder, "never go full retard".

Plus the bulimic beauty queen dies, the disabled father dies, the mortician's mother committed suicide a few years back, and both the mortician and the bulimic beauty queen entertain thoughts of suicide, and are shown about to act on them. There's really way too much death, and near-death, for this to make it as a mainstream movie.

That said, it is touching how the mortician wakes the bulimic beauty queen with a kiss. And then, having had a near-death experience, she re-evaluates her life, and hides away with the mortician and his dad. Where, of course, love blossoms despite the complications of a mortician who kisses corpses. And the mortician realizes that even if your mom commits suicide, and your disabled dad drops dead playing golf... if you have a field of sunflowers, and get to sleep with Blake Lively, then things can't be too bad.

But Lively and Minghela were cute together, and they made it a pretty entertaining and touching story. And Mantegna was good, as always, as the father, and he also had some sweet scenes with his son. Overall, better than it sounds, and better than it deserved to be. Rather than quirky, it was more bizarre and morbid... but in a good way. I enjoyed it, and I think it's good enough that it deserves a wider audience.

7 out of 17 people found the following review useful:
Zack's wild and crazy plundering of movies he likes, 4 April 2011
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

At the Pitch Meeting, somewhere in LA, Zack Snyder and a Studio Boss...

SB: Hey, Zack, man, I loved your Watchmen and 300 movies. Whatchya got for us today, dude?

ZS: Well... Charlie's Angels had 3 hot babes. I think there should have been 5. And the Matrix had 2 alternate universes, there really should have been 3. More is better, right?

SB: I can dig that.

ZS: And I liked that Tarantino multiple movies in a single movie thing that he did with Grind House, recently.

SB: Yeah, but that was too high concept. We had to chop them back into separate movies.

ZS: That's because Quentin made them too separate. What you need is to mix them up in the same movie, and keep the running time under 2 hours.

SB: So, what are these separate pieces then, Zack, mi amigo?

ZS: Well, I don't want to over-simplify, but one reality is kinda like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. But with hot, semi-naked chicks, instead of Jack Nicholson and an overgrown Indian.

SB: OFOTCN was a great movie... but I always thought something was missing. And what else?

ZS: I think a bit of Moulin Rouge... but with a psycho pimp and some Kung Fu.

SB: Man, you are one crazy dude, I always thought there should have been more Kung Fu in Moulin Rouge!

ZS: And then a bit of Kill Bill.

SB: But Bill's dead.

ZS: Yeah, I know... but I found someone who looks just like him! Isn't that cool? And then I added some giant robot samurai!

SB: Whoa, most excellent, dude! The kids are crying out for giant robot samurai! Are you throwing anything else in here, or are you done already?

ZS: Well, those are just the main realities. But we have some adventure worlds, too. I got some stuff happenin' on a high-tech train with a bomb and weaponized androids. And a world war I adventure which is kinda like Inglourious Basterds, but with hot, semi-naked chicks in my kill squad, instead of a bunch of Jewish dudes. With German soldiers as zombies driven by clockwork and steam. And then a bit of fantasy-style Lord of the Rings with Orcs and Dragons, but with hot, semi-naked chicks on a quest, instead of those ugly little Hobbit dudes.

SB: Man, you are really pushing the envelope here, Zack! It sounds wild and exciting, with, like, remakes of every cool movie of the last 20 years! Um... not to be churlish, but does it have a story too?

ZS: Of course. There's a hot, semi-naked chick, framed for a murder she didn't commit by her evil stepfather. And then she bonds with her fellow inmates, and teaches them self-reliance and stuff. Although it's not very useful, 'cos she gets most of them killed. Except one. Who finds freedom with Bill. And there's some quests, not for a ring, but for a map, fire, knife, key... which sorta help get them out of wherever they are. And some really bad dudes. And lobotomies. And did I mention the hot, semi-naked chicks? I'm going for boots, thigh-highs, little skirts, and plenty o' cleavage.

SB: Zach, you crazy sob! Let's do it! I got $75m to make it! Is that enough to include a ton of CGI and the hyper-real look you did with 300? And a really loud rock / pop / rap soundtrack?

ZS: Absolutely, man. Oh... and make it $82m, and I'll get Don from Mad Men to add some class.

SB: This is so crazy, it might just work!

GJ: And it did. Don't ask me to explain why, but it was kinda fun. I guess the hot, semi-naked chicks helped it along. Just don't over-analyze it, or expect anything highbrow. I feel bad admitting it, but I liked it.

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Standing the test of Time, 5 March 2011
10/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I just watched this on HBO HD, 10 years after it was released in cinemas, and I was moved to comment. I watched this when it first came out, and I enjoyed it then. But 10 years later, watching it again, I was really struck by how enjoyable and engaging it is. Over 2 hours of solid entertainment, it didn't drag for one minute.

In particular, it has an added poignancy as it features Heath Ledger's first lead role. Later, Heath Ledger would have some outstanding roles in Brokeback Mountain (for which he was nominated for an Oscar) and The Dark Knight (for which I think he won an Oscar). Of course, his later performances were more assured and more powerful, and deserving of the acclaim. But here in A Knight's Tale, he carries the film, and shows the potential he went on to fulfil. And, to my mind, while I enjoyed both Brokeback and Dark Knight, the former is controversial in its subject matter, and the latter is rather dark and violent. For a family-friendly demonstration of Heath Ledger's greatness, and the sadness of his untimely death, I really think you should look no further than A Knight's Tale.

But it wasn't just Heath Ledger who did well in an early role. Particular praise has to go to Paul Bettany for a standout early performance as Chaucer. From the time they meet him, naked on the road, Chaucer is very funny, and a core part of the movie as the principal supporting actor.

However, this is an ensemble cast, with Heath Ledger's team supporting him and inspiring him, and he, in turn, earning their loyalty, respect, and love. We have Chaucer, as mentioned, together with Wat and Roland, who both have funny and touching moments. We also have a feisty lady blacksmith Kate, who's also great, and has some nice moments like her early trademark.

The love interest, Shannyn Sossamon, is beautiful, and amusing as a medieval proto-feminist, Jocelyn. Her maid is cute too (as is the blacksmith), so there is plenty of eye candy on display. I personally think Sossamon does a good job, and there are some nice moments between her and Ledger.

Then we have two fine actors with smaller, but pivotal roles, James Purefoy as the Prince of Wales, who jousts (incognito) with, and later saves, Heath Ledger. And Rufus Sewell, who does a great job as Count Adhemar, the high-achieving, but villainous, tournament champion, who we boo enthusiastically.

And we have veteran actor Christopher Cazenove, squeezing out an emotional performance as Ledger's father, a blind thatcher.

As others have said, the story is not new, and it's entirely predictable. But it doesn't seem any the worse for it. And, in the process, it includes several story threads, including triumph over adversity, finding true love, reuniting with family... while throwing in some extras like the value of loyalty, that one good turns deserves another, and that if you try hard enough, you can achieve your dreams. And that the bad guy will finish flat on his back, just as he should.

As it's a "knight's tale", it's medieval. But not as we know it. It's totally anachronistic, with modern music, dancing, clothing, feisty feminists, and contemporary manner of speech. Many criticize this, but I think it's one of the best aspects of the movie, and it's very cleverly done, not accidental. Personally, I love the way it includes modern sports and dance conventions within an older setting, it makes the movie more accessible, and most of the time it's very funny. It's hard to pick specific examples, but early on the crowd starts doing Queen's We Will Rock You at a jousting tournament. And later, at the Winners' Ball, Ledger's old country dance morphs into David Bowie's Golden Years. Both are excellently done, and help you understand the action better, rather than detracting something by not being of the era.

At it's core, it's a pretty decent movie. And the supporting cast does a good job, so that gives it bonus points. I personally love the anachronistic style, it adds a lot of humor and insight to the movie. But it's definitely not to everyone's taste. Finally, you have two actors, before they were famous, delivering great performances. It's the presence of Bettany, and, Ledger, in particular, which elevates this movie to greatness.

It's like Top Gun, but with horses and lances, instead of jets. And Heath Ledger instead of Tom Cruise.

True Grit (2010)
2 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
True Boredom, 20 February 2011
6/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It's always hard to be a dissenting voice, you know, I really did want to see the Emperor's New Clothes. Unfortunately, for me, the new Coen brothers' True Grit remained stubbornly naked, and I found myself repeatedly looking at my watch, and wondering if it would soon be over, and what was I gonna have for dinner after.

I do like Coen movies, my favorite is The Big Lebowski, but there are several good ones. I enjoyed Brother where art Thou, which I guess is similarly old school. So with Oscar buzz, and those clever Coen boys in charge, I had high hopes.

And I like the actors too. Matt Damon has done some great stuff, love the Bourne movies. And Jeff Bridges is always watchable, and The Big Lebowski is probably one of the high spots of his career. So it's not the actors or the acting. Damon and Bridges are good in this movie, and Hailee Steinfeld does a very good job as the heroine Mattie Ross.

And it looks good too, nice cinematography of the Wild West.

So, I wondered, where does it all go wrong? I've never read the original book, and I can't really remember the John Wayne movie, other than the feeling that it wasn't played totally straight. But my guess is, that in a Wild, Wild West where dudes shoot other dudes in the back over a dollar or an unkind word, it isn't super plausible that a 14 year old girl would make much of a bounty hunter. Today, an opinionated girl can be a mouthy bitch, and get away with it. Seems to me that back then you would just shoot the annoying little tyke and move on to more important business.

In other words, I suspect that the book is meant to be rather funny, and not a believable illustration of your typical mis-matched posse with a pompous and loquacious Texas Ranger (Damon as le beef, not LaBoeuf), a drunk, one-eyed, over-the-hill marshall (Bridges as Rooster Cogburn), and the annoying and vengeful innocent (Steinfeld as Mattie), in search of what seems to be a bunch of dim-witted and incompetent outlaws (Josh Brolin and Barry Pepper as Tom Chaney and Ned Pepper). In one scene, Chaney (the, maybe, villain) even explains to Mattie how to shoot a gun properly... while she's pointing at him. There ain't no way this is a serious scene! But... the Coens play the whole thing very straight, as if the source material was a straightforward serious piece of fiction. For me, this didn't work at all. I sensed the underlying comedy, but didn't see anyone laughing.

To compound the problem, the Coens combined serious with super retro realism, with a big emphasis on authentic Olde West style, and, in particular, retro style of speech. It's sort of interesting, of course, to get a feel for the old west, but for a modern audience, I just don't feel that it adds anything. I know we talked differently years ago, but, as long you keep the Rolex out of shot, I'm cool if they all sound like you and me.

In summary, the photography and acting was very good. But it's played too serious, with too few laughs, and with an overly retro feel that strives for authenticity but is distracting and adds to the seriousness quotient. Not a bad movie, by any means, but definitely not worthy of the hype. And, I think, ditto for the principal actors, Bridges, Damon and Steinfeld. All three are good, and I liked their performances, but I think you have to do better to win an Oscar.

Iron Man 2 (2010)
18 out of 34 people found the following review useful:
Only the churlish would complain!, 3 May 2010
10/10

I saw this at a free preview in Singapore, so reviewing it seems like the least I can do. More importantly, not only was it great value for a free viewing, but I plan to pay to see it again later this week.

Sequels almost always suck, so I was expecting to be disappointed, especially as I loved the first movie (and I'm not a comic book movie fan, generally).

Robert Downey Jr is just great, again! Iron Man, and now IronMan 2, is warm, and funny, and entertaining... because Downey is.

Supporting characters from last time (Paltrow, Cheadle, Favreau) were fine, and provided continuity. Cheadle had a bit more this time, so we got the bromance thang going.

This time Stark's joined by a bunch of new characters. Sam Rockwell was thoroughly entertaining as his arch-rival Justin Hammer, very funny. Scarlett Johansson got to wear some skin-tight outfit as an ass-kicking Russian spy, nice. Samuel L. Jackson, shows up briefly (but very coolly) as a one-eyed spy boss. And the resurrected Mickey Rourke shows off his Russian accent as the vengeful genius with a grudge, and a neat turn in remote controlled drone (very topical) Iron Men.

And let's not forget the Ironettes! Even the AC/DC soundtrack was OK (and I loathe AC/DC, they're so last century).

If you liked Iron Man, you'll like Iron Man 2. What more do you want, buddy?

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Annoying Chick Flick!, 10 January 2010
6/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Nancy Meyers writes (and directs) these glossy California movies for wealthy, divorced, older women. Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give, and now Meryl Streep in It's Complicated. Diane had a nice, multi-million dollar house by the beach... now Meryl has a fancy, multi-million dollar home in sunny Santa Barbara... which needs a big extension from Hollywood architect Steve Martin. Honestly, I find it difficult to rustle up much sympathy for the travails of affluent LA-suburban women.

The central conceit of this movie (and Something's Gotta Give before it), is that men are cheating idiots, who leave their wonderful wives (and lovely children) for younger women. But secretly ache for a nice, clever, mature (60-ish), divorced woman (like Diane, Meryl, or, indeed, I suspect, Nancy Meyers herself). I don't know which California Nancy is describing, but in the one I've seen, guys trade in their wife for a younger model... and then a few years later, trade her in for an even younger one. I don't see any trend where guys like Alec Baldwin (in this movie), or Jack Nicolson (in Something's Gotta Give), really want to give up their bodacious 30-something wife/girlfriend... for a 60-something stylish divorcée. But I can see why, for certain women (like Nancy and her many fans), this version of the world is much more appealing than reality.

In Something's Gotta Give, Jack Nicolson sees the light, and ditches his hot young babe, for her wonderful mom. In It's Complicated, Alec ditches his hot young babe, for a wonderful mom and older career woman... who's (oh, it's so complicated!) is his EX wife, who he dumped many years before.

Leaving aside the glossy materialism, and the fundamental mismatch with reality, Nancy gets great actors involved like Diane Keaton and Jack Nicolson... or, in this case, Meryl Streep and Alec Baldwin. Both are excellent in this movie, especially Alec Baldwin, who's charming and funny... even if he is a cheating (twice) love rat. So even if the premise is total tosh, the actors are enjoyable to watch. In this movie, they are joined by Steve Martin (playing serious), and John Krasinski (from The Office).

Alec and Meryl are enjoyable to watch, so I didn't get up and leave. But, like Something's Gotta Give before it, I personally find these movies irritating and unfunny. However, to be fair, there was a lot of laughter, so I think, for some, this is a funny, insightful movie. I'd guess the Nancy demographic is white, American, female. With extra enjoyment value for older well-off women. Definitely a Chick Flick!


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]