I don't like to shop very much, frankly speaking and I've got this aversion for credit cards too so, I didn't think I was going to like Confessions of a Shopaholic very much. But I kind of liked it. Between 1 to 5, I'd give it a 3.5 rating for entertaining me. No, actually a 2.5 for the movie and an extra 0.5 for Hugh Dancy and Isla Fisher each. :-)
The book was much better although I didn't quite get it either. It's about a young girl who finds shopping therapeutic (yawn!) and she just can't help herself whenever she walks past these stores. Hence, she dragged up quite a bill and owed the bank more than she can ever dream of earning in a month.
She wants to write for a fashion mag but there's no opening there for her so she ends up working for, albeit as a stepping stone, the sister company....a boring financial magazine. TA DA! Someone with huge debt working for a financial magazine.
But the good news is that the boss is a dashing man who had a thing for her blunt outlook about finances and money (mostly based on her experience in shopping and using her credit card). And he's handsome as well. :-) sorry....
But it's something the handsome hunk of a boss doesn't have to know, of course.
Isla Fisher is funny as hell but there were some parts which I felt was carried a little too far. Like she was forcing too much slapstick into the cutesy character. The character is supposed to be innocent and naive but she made the character look more like Charlie Chaplin.
Oh, I enjoyed her performance and she gave me lots of laughs but I just thought that, based on the fact that I read the book, it should have been a lot less slapstick.
Too much slapstick doesn't meant that I can't enjoy an incredibly adorable and funny scene like the one above. She just went completely bananas with her dancing. According to Dancy, he did not foul up any of the scenes while filming this despite how funny Isla Fisher was. I think they just covered it up well. How can anyone stand there and not laugh out loud when she's doing those stupid dance moves???!!
I liked the green scarf. It's a symbol of the girl who knew absolutely nothing about share market, stocks exchange and all that financial talk but shared information with readers in a very genuine and down-to-earth fashion. This scarf is also a scarf that her boss helped fund (before she was hired) when she went for the interview.
I know it's supposed to be a comedy and not romantic comedy per se but I just wished there was more chemistry between Hugh Dancy and Isla Fisher. There were very few scenes that gave them that chance. Every time they are together, she's doing something hilarious and there are not many opportunities given to them to develop their love story. So, the love story part....urgh....very empty. Almost non-existent.
Which led to the predictable outcome of a deadwood kissing scene. Hugh Dancy kissed the pants off of Maria Bello in 'The Jane Austen Book Club' (which I will talk about later) who is 8 years his senior! Read again....eight years his SENIOR. If he can create chemistry with Maria Bello and not Isla Fisher, then there's something wrong with the script, no?
Yes, at the end of the day, there's nothing wrong with the actors, nothing wrong with the premise, nothing wrong with the storyline (maybe a little) but everything's wrong with the script.
I blame the lousy scriptwriting.
The book was much better although I didn't quite get it either. It's about a young girl who finds shopping therapeutic (yawn!) and she just can't help herself whenever she walks past these stores. Hence, she dragged up quite a bill and owed the bank more than she can ever dream of earning in a month.
She wants to write for a fashion mag but there's no opening there for her so she ends up working for, albeit as a stepping stone, the sister company....a boring financial magazine. TA DA! Someone with huge debt working for a financial magazine.
But the good news is that the boss is a dashing man who had a thing for her blunt outlook about finances and money (mostly based on her experience in shopping and using her credit card). And he's handsome as well. :-) sorry....
But it's something the handsome hunk of a boss doesn't have to know, of course.
Isla Fisher is funny as hell but there were some parts which I felt was carried a little too far. Like she was forcing too much slapstick into the cutesy character. The character is supposed to be innocent and naive but she made the character look more like Charlie Chaplin.
Oh, I enjoyed her performance and she gave me lots of laughs but I just thought that, based on the fact that I read the book, it should have been a lot less slapstick.
Too much slapstick doesn't meant that I can't enjoy an incredibly adorable and funny scene like the one above. She just went completely bananas with her dancing. According to Dancy, he did not foul up any of the scenes while filming this despite how funny Isla Fisher was. I think they just covered it up well. How can anyone stand there and not laugh out loud when she's doing those stupid dance moves???!!
I liked the green scarf. It's a symbol of the girl who knew absolutely nothing about share market, stocks exchange and all that financial talk but shared information with readers in a very genuine and down-to-earth fashion. This scarf is also a scarf that her boss helped fund (before she was hired) when she went for the interview.
I know it's supposed to be a comedy and not romantic comedy per se but I just wished there was more chemistry between Hugh Dancy and Isla Fisher. There were very few scenes that gave them that chance. Every time they are together, she's doing something hilarious and there are not many opportunities given to them to develop their love story. So, the love story part....urgh....very empty. Almost non-existent.
Which led to the predictable outcome of a deadwood kissing scene. Hugh Dancy kissed the pants off of Maria Bello in 'The Jane Austen Book Club' (which I will talk about later) who is 8 years his senior! Read again....eight years his SENIOR. If he can create chemistry with Maria Bello and not Isla Fisher, then there's something wrong with the script, no?
Yes, at the end of the day, there's nothing wrong with the actors, nothing wrong with the premise, nothing wrong with the storyline (maybe a little) but everything's wrong with the script.
I blame the lousy scriptwriting.
Comments