Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Missy Vixen

(16,207 posts)
Sat Jan 28, 2012, 07:56 PM Jan 2012

The New York Times movie critic pens what I believe might be the greatest review ever

Let's just say he hated the movie, and proceeded to tell us all why.

http://movies.nytimes.com/2012/01/28/movies/katherine-heigl-in-film-based-on-janet-evanovich-novel.html?src=me&ref=movies

The first paragraph is a thing of beauty. I wish I'd written it myself.

“One for the Money,” the latest Katherine Heigl vehicle to park itself in the multiplexes, is also the title of a best-selling novel by Janet Evanovich. It is worth stating this fact at the outset to avoid the mistaken but entirely plausible assumption that the phrase somehow made its way onto the lobby posters from the subject line of an e-mail from Ms. Heigl’s agent.


It's only exceeded by the final paragraph.

Speaking of television, the one mildly interesting thing about “One for the Money” — apart from Debbie Reynolds’s scene-stealing shtick as Stephanie’s grandmother — is that it offers a data point for those studying the cultural decline of cinema. I don’t mean this in any grandiose or melodramatic way. Not long ago it would have been possible to convey the bland, lazy, pedestrian qualities of this picture — its lackadaisical pacing, by-the-numbers performances, irritating music and drab visual texture — by likening it to a made-for-TV movie or an episode of a series on basic cable. But nowadays that would be praise, and movies like this must set their own standard for mediocrity.


Disclaimer: I enjoyed Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum series. In the right hands, it would have been hilarious, campy fun. In Katherine Heigl's hands, it's a mess.

I haz a sad.
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The New York Times movie critic pens what I believe might be the greatest review ever (Original Post) Missy Vixen Jan 2012 OP
did you go see it? Quantess Jan 2012 #1
I won't be seeing it Missy Vixen Jan 2012 #3
I'm not a Katherine Heigl fan & thought she was irritatingly overwrought on Grey's Anatomy... hlthe2b Jan 2012 #2

Missy Vixen

(16,207 posts)
3. I won't be seeing it
Sun Jan 29, 2012, 03:04 AM
Jan 2012

Heigl is irritating under the best of circumstances. She's laid waste to multiple rom-coms already; I didn't want to watch her trash a series I truly enjoyed through the first 10 books.

Are you planning on seeing it?

hlthe2b

(102,247 posts)
2. I'm not a Katherine Heigl fan & thought she was irritatingly overwrought on Grey's Anatomy...
Sat Jan 28, 2012, 08:42 PM
Jan 2012

But, at least she was part of an ensemble cast and the talent of the others often tended to carry her.

I can not imagine who goes to see her "star" films. I have seen a few minutes of two in the video store and while stopping by a friend's house and chatting with her (then viewing) daughter. That was quite enough.

Latest Discussions»The DU Lounge»The New York Times movie ...