Friday, March 13, 2009

He's Just Not That Into You

Had some time to kill today so it was either watch Slumdog Millionaire for the second time (tempting) or sit through this one. I chose He's Just Not That Into You, wondering the whole time what the heck am I going in here for?

Idle curiosity I guess. I know this was a best selling book and thought it would be interesting to see how they turn it into a movie. Here's a shocker - it was better than I thought it would be!

I'm not a Jennifer Aniston fan but she was good. She was diluted enough with so many other actors that she didn't have time for me to get sick of her I guess. There are lots of cuts back and forth as we follow several couples and potential couples and see the signs that cue us in on whether the person is truly interested or not.

Scarlet Johansson is gorgeous throughout, and Gennifer Goodwin is adorable as a girl who never seems to get any guys interested in her. She had me rooting for her from the beginning. Drew Barrymore plays a nerdy sort of uncomfortable-in-her-own-skin girl, and she actually seems uncomfortable. Good acting or ??

The surprise performance was from Jennifer Connelly (Dark Water, House of Sand and Fog, Beautiful Mind)- this was pretty fluffy stuff for her and she played it for all it's worth. She added a dimension of gravity to the movie and did a great job with what she has to work with.

There are many good looking hunky guys who show up - Justin Long, Bradley Cooper, and oh yeah Ben Affleck is in it. It was a shocker to see Kris Kristofferson on the screen again. He plays Jennifer Aniston's father and comes off kind and patient with limited lines (that's a good thing).

The only story line I found truly annoying was the Bennifer one with Affleck and Aniston. Could be I don't like these actors, could also be that it was the most unbelievable of the stories in the whole thing.

I think this movie does well by the book, isn't overly goofy or whacky, makes very good points, and is entertaining. Can't ask for much more than that.

I'm giving it a '3'.

No comments: