…and the quest to see everything

Guilty Pleasure? 27 Dresses

I’m sorry for inflicting this movie unto you, which began Katherine Heigl‘s reign of terror of  romantic comedies, making films more sexist that the ‘sexist’ Knocked Up. I tuned into 27 Dresses just when the impossibly altruistic Jane (Heigl) juggles two weddings during the same night. The Brooklyn Bridge backdrop during a montage makes it obvious that the studio didn’t want to pay real money for an on location shooting if this queen of box office flops follows her tradition.

Jane’s tricks a handful of people except for one man, Kyle Doyle (James Marsden), a marriage hater who writes for the style section of a minor league newspaper. Which, by the way, what other kind of newspapers are there in the Big Apple between the New York Times and tampon wrappers? Maulik Pancholy and Michael Scott’s girlfriend, by the way, costar as Kyle’s co-staffers. Anyway, Jane’s idealistic, he’s cynical, they bicker until the hour mark where he relents and they fall down the fuck in love.

Movies like this sets up glamorous stars like Heigl into ‘best friend’ types. Let’s dye her hair to a honey brunette so she’ll look frumpier compared to her hotter blonde sister, Tess (Malin Akerman), the latter falling in love with Jane’s boss (Edward Burns, Christy Turlington’s husband)! And what kind of person goes to the club and wears a top that makes her look like a Regency-era woman? Although I do admit that there are parts of this characterization that I believe. Heigl morphs her slender bone structure into showing us herself in her younger years, the kind of girl-turned ingenue with puffy cheeks and wore braces as a child. And there’s something about her line deliveries, a little husk in her alto voice, effectively playing a woman that’s frazzled yet witty.

And you know what? I also don’t mind the script, making its main gimmick to make Heigl look like a loser. It also allows its ensemble of B-list actors to talk on top of each other. This is the kind of movie that would be deemed a ‘classic’ had it been released in the 80’s or earlier. James Marsden’s charisma willfully distracts us from how Kyle is Jane’s terribly written foil.

Again, it’s ridiculous to have Katherine Heigl as the ‘always the bridesmaid’ type but it’s equally unfair for the talented Judy Greer to keep holding the ‘slutty best friend’ torch. She thanklessly gives the movie its dirty tongue colour – watch out for some daddy issues and sexual references from other characters too – and she slaps Heigl here, which is something, I assume, that you also want to do.

8 responses

  1. aw man this was on the other night when I got back from the cinema. My missus was watching it and I quickly got rid of it!!

    Cool that it is a guilty pleasure…really guilty..

    November 29, 2011 at 5:34 am

  2. Katherine Heigl movies are the MSG of contemporary cinema, although some of us need her once in a while.

    November 29, 2011 at 6:26 pm

  3. Aaaah, Katey Heigl. I sort of love her in a “damn Kate, what the hell went wrong” sort of way. Because, yes, I used to a be a massive fan of Grey’s Anatomy (now I’m just a fleeting fan) and she was great on it. Emmy win and all. And then she went the film route, and even though I could see her doing better with the material than someone like, say, [insert bad female actor in their twenties] would it makes me wonder why she squanders her talent. Is it just for the money? Is she unable to discern bad from good? That being said, I’m looking forward to her new movie One for the Money because I read the book a long time ago, once upon a time and I sort of think it could be NOT bad. Faint praise I know, but ah well.

    And, whooo, that was an unnecessarily long comment.

    November 30, 2011 at 7:46 pm

    • Everyone who went to college during the first two seasons of Greys were big fans. Or most people at least. They were smitten by, among many things Izzie.

      I remember reading criticism of this film and one writer comparing Heigl to Lombard and I kind of see it. 27 Dresses is definitely ghettozied for being a rom com this day and age. I wanna know what she can do if she got better comedy roles. And her being the lead to shitty female comedies is just as bad, if not slightly better, than an equally attractive and talented actress squandering herself as the babe or the shrew in male-centred comedies.

      Or what would happen if she continued in TV and got roles the Emily VanCamp is too young for.

      And speaking of Greys it’s kinda sad that Sandra Oh isn’t more famous.

      November 30, 2011 at 11:43 pm

  4. OH MY GOD!!!!! I know (on Sandra Oh). My older sister still calls her Arliss every time I happen to watch Grey’s when she’s around, and I saw her in an old re-run of Six Feet Under the other playing a porn star, and I keep thinking why, WHY didn’t Sideways turn her into the big star she deserves? Is it because she’s Asian? Is it because she’s not a malleable actor? Shame either way.

    December 1, 2011 at 11:15 am

    • She played a porn star in Six Feet Under? God, I wish my thirteen year old self didn’t give upon that show after Season 1.

      Or maybe she just sounds too intelligent and mature to be a big star. Even the greatest, Britishest, Catest, most depressed actresses have to be MPDG.

      Oh, and I have Sideways on my DVD collection (or the family’s, really) and its on TV once in a while here but I never watch it. I should because I’m a proud Asian-Canadian and because Virginia Madsen, who I herd should have been famous because of Sideways.

      December 1, 2011 at 3:39 pm

  5. I find it funny how Heigl always complains about her roles being bitchy, whiny, uncapable women (as this one is to a certain extent) and yet she continues to do the same thing (New Year’s eve trailer would appear to be one as well).

    December 14, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    • Has she complained about her typecasting lately? I want to read this. I also want to see how big her mortgage is to justify her crap.

      And I kind of want to see Heigl and Sofia Vergara in New Years Eve but I probably won’t be able to see it until valentine’s Day. #BaDumChing

      December 14, 2011 at 3:25 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s