Despite what my mother may say, I don’t think anyone could ever accuse me of being a film snob. I’ve liked some rather questionable, and some outright bad, movies. (When in college, I actually paid money to see Josie and the Pussycats in the theater, and I enjoyed it. True story.) I can even get behind a simplistic romantic comedy if it’s entertaining and offers at least one original idea. That being said, when it comes to My Sassy Girl, I’m going to have to SKIP IT.

First there’s the story; kooky girl meets uptight boy and shakes up his life. You mean like Sweet November? Or the TV show Dharma & Greg? Or maybe more along the lines of Garden State? Or even Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind? Or maybe it doesn’t even matter, since variations of this storyline have been done to death by a slew of better movies.

Then there’s the actors. Someone at some point decided that Elisha Cuthbert was more than a pretty face and let her star in movies, when she really should stick to roles like the leading lady’s best friend or the girl the leading man lusts after before he ends up with his true love. And then Jesse Bradford is that guy who did that one movie…or was it that other movie…well, he looks familiar, so I guess he was in something I saw at some point, but didn’t care enough to remember.

And then there’s the awful title. “My Sassy Girl,” seriously? Was “My Crazy Lady” already taken? What about “My Super Kooky Chick” or “My Impulsive Impudent Gal”? (And yes, I realize this movie is a remake, but plenty of remakes have had the good sense to adopt a title better than the original one.)

So while I’m sure this movie will have a charming moment or two, I’m going to have to skip out on watching mediocre actors tell a story I’ve already seen at least a dozen times. Maybe if I’m lucky, Josie and the Pussycats will be on cable and I can revel in watching a quality second-rate movie.

My Sassy Girl is rated PG-13 and opens some time in Spring 2008. (Official site)

I admit it; I enjoyed watching Sex and the City when it was on HBO. It was an entertaining show, often both hilarious and heartbreaking, and it was a fun way to escape into a fantasy world where I could live in one of those swanky Manhattan apartments, afford those ridiculous shoes, find a date with the snap of my fingers, and have a group of fiercely loyal gal pals. And yet, I have no desire to see the movie when it opens this spring.

Why? Because the show ended so neatly. Each character’s story arc came to a definitive close and was tied up with a neat little bow. I watched as Carrie, Samantha, Miranda, and Charlotte grew and evolved and all settled down into their versions of ‘happily ever after’. There’s a reason fairy tales end after the happy ending; because after ‘happily ever after’, it’s boring!

One of my favorite parts of the television series was the endless string of losers the girls would date. Some of my personal favorites were Charlotte’s ‘likes to get into fights guy’, Miranda’s ‘overeater’, and Samantha’s ‘other Sam Jones’. But at the end of the series, each one of them settled down (in various ways) with their chosen guy. Where’s the fun in that? What is Sex and the City without Carrie and Mr. Big’s ‘will they or won’t they’ relationship? Or without Charlotte “The Rules” York single-handedly setting the women’s movement backwards with her constant mantra of “get married, make babies, get married, make babies, get married, make babies”? Or without Miranda keeping everyone at a distance with her snarkiness and quick temper? And let’s face it; if Samantha isn’t treating her vagina like the drive-thru at McDonald’s, she’s just not being the Samantha we all love/hate.

So unlike many other Sex and the City fans, I will not be at the theater opening night, wearing an “I’m a Carrie” t-shirt, and I’ll instead wait to RENT IT. It was an entertaining television show, not a lifestyle to mimic, and it ended, quite nicely, several years ago. Now if HBO ever gets its act together and makes a Deadwood movie, I’ll be all over that. There isn’t anything neat and pretty about the way they left those fans dangling.

Sex and the City: the Movie is not yet rated and opens May 30. (IMDB page)

Recipe for Made of Honor:

Take two parts My Best Friend’s Wedding, one part Four Weddings and a Funeral, a couple of cheesy pratfalls, shake well, and pour over McDreamy Patrick Dempsey. Serve chilled and enjoy!

I’m slightly curious if there’s an original bone anywhere in this movie, which seems to have just borrowed bits and pieces from some of the most popular romantic comedies ever made. I admit to enjoying a chick flick when it’s clever and original, but this rehash of pilfered pieces leaves me cold. In a nutshell, Dempsey takes too long to realize he’s in love with his best friend (yes, a female best friend). By the time he realizes that she’s his one and only, she’s engaged to someone else. And to add the extra twist to the knife, she asks him to be her maid of honor. Can he put a stop to the wedding to go after his own happily ever after? Should he even try to meddle with his best friend’s happiness? Does anyone really care?

I may watch this whenever it finds it’s way to basic cable, but for now this is a SKIP IT for me. I’ve seen more original plots in episodes of Saved by the Bell (and there ain’t nothing original about Saved by the Bell).

Made of Honor is not yet rated and opens May 8. (Official site)

I don’t envy the jobs of those who cut together movie trailers. After going through a movie several times to find the pieces to use, they must reach a point where they say, “F*** this movie, f*** this trailer, I don’t give a f*** anymore!” Apparently, whoever put together the trailer for Fool’s Gold reached his breaking point sooner than most of his colleagues, because it’s a mess.

Attempting to become the next Meg Ryan/Tom Hanks onscreen power couple, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days costars Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey team up again for another romantic comedy. Or at least I think it’s a romantic comedy, but it may be an adventure movie (there’s something about sunken treasure going on). Kate and Matt are unhappily married and on the way to divorce. Kate wants to sell her boat and go back to school, so Matt blows up Kate’s boat. Matt is an amateur treasure hunter, and while on one of his hunts, he finds his way into the good graces of a wealthy daddy/daughter duo. But then Kate is working on their yacht as a waitress or something, and it none too pleased to see Matt dining with them. Then they hear about some sunken treasure, and the squabbling divorcees-to-be decide to team up and find it. Then they get it on in a cave. Oh, and Donald Sutherland is there, too. Confused yet? Good, because so am I.

So is this a romantic chick flick, or an action/adventure movie? Or some sort of combo meal? And why is Kate complaining about how stupid and lazy Matt is, yet implies that he’s the one with all the money in the relationship? And why would two people who supposedly hate each other (though we know they don’t) agree to go treasure hunting together? And why do I still plan to RENT IT, despite not knowing what the f*** is going on? Damn you Hudson and McConaughey, and your charming ways that compel me to watch your mess of a movie!

Fool’s Gold is rated PG-13 and opens February 8. (Official site)

With a lesser cast, Definitely, Maybe would probably be just another Lifetime Movie of the Week. But the executives were lucky enough to get Ryan Reynolds, Abigail Breslin, Isla Fisher, and Rachel Weisz to star, so the movie gets bumped up from Lifetime original production to movie I’ll probably wait to watch on Lifetime.

Maya (Breslin) asks her father (Reynolds) to tell her the story of how her soon to be divorced parents met. Turns out, dad was a bit of a man-whore back in the day, and there were several women in his life at the time he met his almost ex-wife. So he tells her the story of his relationship with all the women, with some names and events changed to protect the innocent, and Maya must solve the mystery of “which one is my mom”. I find it hard to believe that a kid Maya’s age (somewhere around 10-12 I’d guess) knows nothing about her parent’s history together, but whatever. I’ll still definitely, maybe, possibly, supposedly, indubitably RENT IT.

Definitely, Maybe is rated PG-13 and opens February 14. (Official site)

Ok, I’ve watched the trailer for 27 Dresses four times now, and the only thing I can think of is “meh.” That’s not a good sign, but 27 Dresses looks better than the drivel that studios usually release in the depths of January.

Katherine Heigl (in her first attempt to open a movie on her own) plays a woman who has been a bridesmaid 27 times, and now she is about to watch her younger sister marry the man she’s in love with. Throw in Rupert Everett, and you’ve got the sequel to My Best Friend’s Wedding.

With a title like 27 Dresses, this couldn’t be more of a chick flick. But here I am, a member of the movie’s target demographic, and I’m on the fence. Why is that? Well, any woman who would subject herself to being a bridesmaid 27 times is just crazy, I tell you. And even though I loved Knocked Up, something about Katherine Heigl just rubs me the wrong way. (Sorry.) Then again, Edward Burns gets some screen time, and that’s never a bad thing. James Marsden isn’t so hard on the eyes either.

When January 11 rolls around, if I’m itching to get out of the house and there’s nothing else at the movies, I may just break down and see 27 Dresses. But somehow I highly doubt it. RENT IT.

Riddle me this: Why is it that a trailer featuring a young couple in love, whose time together is cut short by his death, leaves me with a warm fuzzy feeling?

No, it’s not because of my schadenfreudic nature, but rather from a rather eclectic and promising cast. There’s Hilary Swank and Gerard Butler as the young couple in question (you know him from 300, I know him from The Phantom of the Opera. Let’s just agree to disagree). He’s a goofy Irishman, she’s a somewhat uptight American; naturally they’re going to make an adorable pair. Then, after he’s dead, a series of letters he prearranged are delivered to her that instruct her to go on crazy adventures, thus helping her to start her life anew without him. (Methinks this means he was aware of his imminent doom for awhile, though the trailer makes no indication of what sort of tragedy ended his short life.)

And who better to grieve and have crazy adventures with than Gina Gershon and Phoebe, I mean, Lisa Kudrow? And what better eye candy to make you get over your dead husband than Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Denny!) and Harry Connick, Jr.? And the icing on the cake: your mom is Kathy Bates!

P.S., I Love You is definitely not going to shake the foundation of modern cinema, but it certainly looks charming enough for my Netflix queue, so I’m going to RENT IT.

P.S., I Love You is rated PG-13 and opens December 21. (Official site)

As much as I loathe, hate, and despise the term “chick flick”, I’m afraid The Jane Austen Book Club fits the bill perfectly. It’s the story of six women who think it would be fun to form a book club to read and discuss all of Jane Austen’s novels. But as they delve into Austen’s world, they notice that aspects of their lives are mirroring those of the characters in the books, which leads to some emotionally charged soul searching moments that only a true chick flick knows how to portray.

So, needless to say, this film will be a ladies-only affair. And probably only a very select group of ladies will even be interested. If you have no idea who Mr. Darcy is or think that Persuasion is a novel featuring Fabio on the cover, this movie probably isn’t for you. I read the novel the film is based on last summer (I highly recommend it as a quick summer read), and having prior knowledge of Austen’s works should be a prerequisite before reading it. I know very few people familiar with all of Austen’s novels (myself included), and that, unfortunately, takes away some understanding from The Jane Austen Book Club.

I’m going to wait and RENT IT. I’m curious to see how the film matches the novel, and I think Emily Blunt is extremely talented (despite the awful wig she’s wearing in the trailer). Also, Hugh Dancy gets to play one of the few male roles in the film, and after the crap-fest that was Evening, I hope he gets to redeem himself a bit in this one.

The Jane Austen Book Club is rated PG-13 and opens September 21. (Official site)

Here are two new romantic comedies that both seem worthy of RENT IT reviews.

First is No Reservations. Top chef Kate, played by Catherine Zeta-Jones, is high maintenance, overworked, overstressed, and the closest relationship she has is with her sauté pans. When her sister dies suddenly (presumably in an auto accident), Kate takes in her niece, played by Little Miss Sunshine’s Abigail Breslin. Then to add to the stress of new and unexpected motherhood, she has to deal with a new sous chef in her kitchen, who happens to be a flirtatious cutie and distracts Kate from the only thing she knows how to do: cook like a maniac.

The story of a career-driven single woman being thrust into the role of “mother” and attempting to have a romance isn’t a new one (Baby Boom and Raising Helen both come to mind). But while the story may not be revolutionary, I do like the cast. Zeta-Jones is lovely and can play high maintenance well, Breslin is cute and talented without being irritating and precocious, and Aaron Eckhart is adorably perfect as Kate’s new love interest/kitchen rival. Certainly not worth my $11, but worth a lazy Sunday afternoon on my couch.

Next is The Feast of Love, which appears to be a series of interweaving vignettes on the subject of love (sort of like Love, Actually). There’s the guy whose marriage is ending because his wife has fallen for another woman. Then there’s the new girl who gets a job at a café owned by that guy, and attracts the attention of the dreamy-eyed boy behind the counter. Then the first guy (with the lesbian wife) falls in love again, but with a woman who isn’t available. Are you following me? No? Well, that’s OK, because we have Morgan Freeman telling these stories to some white woman he appears to be involved with, and I’m sure he’ll explain it all to us.

While the trailer for The Feast of Love feels a little disjointed and incoherent, I’m going to give the movie a chance when it’s out on DVD. I had the same feeling of “what the hell is this” when I first saw the trailer for Love, Actually, and that movie became one of my favorite romantic comedies when I finally conceded to see it. Plus Feast has a pretty decent cast, featuring the afore mentioned Freeman, Greg Kinnear, and Selma Blair.

No Reservations is rated PG and opens July 27. (Official site)

The Feast of Love is rated R and opens in limited release September 14. (IMDB page)

The new film Georgia Rule has already gotten tons of free publicity, all at the expense of its star Lindsay Lohan. Last summer La Linds partied hardy, and called in sick with “dehydration” one too many times. The CEO of Morgan Creek, which produced Georgia Rule, sent Lilo a scathing letter saying she “acted like a spoiled child” and called her “discourteous, irresponsible, and unprofessional.” Snap! The letter was also sent to Lindsay’s eight handlers, so of course it was all over the internet within 36 hours. (Read the letter–it’s classic.)

The trailer for Georgia Rule just landed on the internet, and I must say I am underwhelmed. All that fuss for this? Really? In this run of the mill chick flick, Lohan plays an out of control, hard-drinking teenager (gee, that must have been a stretch) alongside Felicity Huffman and Jane Fonda. Huffman and Fonda play Lohan’s mother and grandmother, respectively, and they all end up in the same house when Huffman’s character has run out of answers. Fonda runs her household with a million “Georgia Rules,” and by the end of the trailer I was really tired of her saying “Georgia Rule!”

Still I’m going to RENT IT because I love Felicity Huffman and I want to see what all Lilo’s controversy was about. Georgia Rule is rated R (which eliminates much of Lilo’s fan base) and opens on May 11. (Official Site)

 Loading …