An unemployed single mother becomes a legal assistant and almost single-handedly brings down a California power company accused of polluting a city's water supply.
Director:
Steven Soderbergh
Stars:
Julia Roberts,
Albert Finney,
David Brisbin
Benjamin Barry is an advertising executive and ladies' man who, to win a big campaign, bets that he can make a woman fall in love with him in 10 days. Andie Anderson covers the "How To" beat for "Composure" magazine and is assigned to write an article on "How to Lose a Guy in 10 days." They meet in a bar shortly after the bet is made.
Director:
Donald Petrie
Stars:
Kate Hudson,
Matthew McConaughey,
Adam Goldberg
After serving as a bridesmaid 27 times, a young woman wrestles with the idea of standing by her sister's side as her sibling marries the man she's secretly in love with.
Director:
Anne Fletcher
Stars:
Katherine Heigl,
James Marsden,
Malin Akerman
A woman who, by a promise made years earlier, is supposed to marry her best friend in three weeks, even though she doesn't want to. When she finds out that he's marrying someone else, she becomes jealous and tries to break off the wedding.Written by
Robert Krzanowski <stonedpsycho@homail.com>
A very rare instance in which the word "fuck" is used in a sexual context in a PG-13 film. Usually a sexualized use of the word automatically gets a film an R-rating. See more »
UK cinema version removes all profanity and inserts inoffensive replacements, most notably in the scene where Julianne explains tells Michael that George came from New York to f*** her. See more »
Or at least the performance of Rupert Everett as the utterly cliched and beyond pointless gay friend was. I remember things acting like he was "deprived" because he was no nominated for an Oscar for his work and why? All he did was spout a bunch of nonsensical lines, sing a song in a restaraunt and fall down for no appearant reason. Gee, how many actors can do that? About a thousand. And many can probably do a better job than he did.
And if this movie didn't have Rupert Everett being all pointless, it would have still gone on unaffected, but it would not have made me like it. A big waste of a free video rental coupon that I was stuck having to watch, the whole film was basically a chance for Julia Roberts to regain herself from a long string a flops. It was a hit, but it shouldn't have been. I've seen many better films than this, with it's dull and occasionally childish story of a Julianne(Roberts'), whose best friend Michael (the usually reliable Dermott Mulroney stuck with a wooden, charisma-free character if there ever was one) is getting married to the nauseating "twenty-year-old" Kimmy(Cameron Diaz, who is, well, quite nauseating and none too interesting herself), which makes her quite jealous. Roberts engages in a bunch of predictable schemes to get Kimmy away from Michael and everything goes just the way you would expect it to go.
And sprinkled in this tired script are childish, ridiculous scenes, such as Roberts and Diaz having a fight in a bathroom with overdone extra watching, characters called "The Slut Cousins"(did a child write this?), and, well, all of the supporting characters in this one are quite ridiculous. I'm not sure who wrote this, but they probably thought to themselves, "let's make a 'cute,' 'formulatic,' love story with a bunch of goofy characters and funny scenes. The entire film basically runs like somebody trying to do that. And not very successfully.
6 of 12 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this
Or at least the performance of Rupert Everett as the utterly cliched and beyond pointless gay friend was. I remember things acting like he was "deprived" because he was no nominated for an Oscar for his work and why? All he did was spout a bunch of nonsensical lines, sing a song in a restaraunt and fall down for no appearant reason. Gee, how many actors can do that? About a thousand. And many can probably do a better job than he did.
And if this movie didn't have Rupert Everett being all pointless, it would have still gone on unaffected, but it would not have made me like it. A big waste of a free video rental coupon that I was stuck having to watch, the whole film was basically a chance for Julia Roberts to regain herself from a long string a flops. It was a hit, but it shouldn't have been. I've seen many better films than this, with it's dull and occasionally childish story of a Julianne(Roberts'), whose best friend Michael (the usually reliable Dermott Mulroney stuck with a wooden, charisma-free character if there ever was one) is getting married to the nauseating "twenty-year-old" Kimmy(Cameron Diaz, who is, well, quite nauseating and none too interesting herself), which makes her quite jealous. Roberts engages in a bunch of predictable schemes to get Kimmy away from Michael and everything goes just the way you would expect it to go.
And sprinkled in this tired script are childish, ridiculous scenes, such as Roberts and Diaz having a fight in a bathroom with overdone extra watching, characters called "The Slut Cousins"(did a child write this?), and, well, all of the supporting characters in this one are quite ridiculous. I'm not sure who wrote this, but they probably thought to themselves, "let's make a 'cute,' 'formulatic,' love story with a bunch of goofy characters and funny scenes. The entire film basically runs like somebody trying to do that. And not very successfully.