Halfway or towards the end of this movie (seriously, there's not much of a difference), I realise, in a brewing sort of manner, similar to how you prepare stew, something: What is the point of this movie?
For every good, or at least any self-respecting movie, should offer us, the suckers who pay $9.50 after $9.50, a singular effort to connect us to the story.
And so here's my question What is so intriguing about a story of two best pals, Rachel, played by sweetie-pie looking Ginnifer Goodwin, and Darcy, the always sun-kissed Kate Hudson, falling in love with the same guy, Dex, the scarily plastic looking Colin Egglesfield (of god-knows-what-movie-he-acted-in fame)?
For 100 minutes (the movie runs at 112 minutes. I guess that answers when I had the epiphany), I see the meek Rachel giving in to I've-got-my-freak-on Darcy at almost every opportunity, that is, until mousey Rachel decides to fight for the man that is supposed to be hers in the first place. You see, Darcy and Dex are happily getting hitched, until a couple of beers and truths threatens to destroy the unison.
I hate to continue because I equally hate to lose my already pathetic number of readers (if any). Would you want me to continue writing something so mundane as this?
While this scenario is pretty realistic and commendable - I guess this is highly possible in real life - it fails to engage me as an outsider looking in.
After the movie, I asked the girlfriend: Why Something Borrowed?
She said: "I guess what's meant to be is meant to be. Darcy is only 'borrowing' Dex from Rachel."
Excellent answer, I thought. Because I was guessing whether the movie is going to return me the 112 minutes I've invested.
For every good, or at least any self-respecting movie, should offer us, the suckers who pay $9.50 after $9.50, a singular effort to connect us to the story.
And so here's my question What is so intriguing about a story of two best pals, Rachel, played by sweetie-pie looking Ginnifer Goodwin, and Darcy, the always sun-kissed Kate Hudson, falling in love with the same guy, Dex, the scarily plastic looking Colin Egglesfield (of god-knows-what-movie-he-acted-in fame)?
For 100 minutes (the movie runs at 112 minutes. I guess that answers when I had the epiphany), I see the meek Rachel giving in to I've-got-my-freak-on Darcy at almost every opportunity, that is, until mousey Rachel decides to fight for the man that is supposed to be hers in the first place. You see, Darcy and Dex are happily getting hitched, until a couple of beers and truths threatens to destroy the unison.
I hate to continue because I equally hate to lose my already pathetic number of readers (if any). Would you want me to continue writing something so mundane as this?
While this scenario is pretty realistic and commendable - I guess this is highly possible in real life - it fails to engage me as an outsider looking in.
After the movie, I asked the girlfriend: Why Something Borrowed?
She said: "I guess what's meant to be is meant to be. Darcy is only 'borrowing' Dex from Rachel."
Excellent answer, I thought. Because I was guessing whether the movie is going to return me the 112 minutes I've invested.
