(what follows isn’t any official type of review of the movie, but more a mish-mash of my thoughts as they relate to both the movie and the books.)
I probably wouldn’t have gone to see this in the theatre, but Groupon ran a deal last week for tickets for $6. Since I knew I had a 4-day weekend (because of all the recent travel) this weekend, I decided to buy a $6 ticket and take myself to see it. I went today and I’m sure you can imagine the theatre wasn’t too busy, but I was surprised that there were still at least 20 other people in the theatre with me on a Monday afternoon.
Before I get into talking about the movie, I have to say a few things about the trailers before the movie. First, the DisneyNature trailer for Chimpanzee made me absolutely sniffly. This looks like a movie Brianna might like, because she adores these animal movies. Second, watching the trailer for the new Nicholas Sparks’ movie The Lucky One, I had a few thoughts: primarily that there’s no way in hell I’ll watch it because we all know how EVERY Sparks’ movie/book ends (someone dies). Apparently, Sparks has something against people being happy for more than temporarily. But I couldn’t help but ogle the lead actor in the movie, because they show him in a pretty sexual light in this trailer, and there’s a lot of sexy times hinted at. And then. And then they put up the actors’ names and I realized…I was ogling Zac Efron. Zac Efron, people. Isn’t he like twelve? I officially feel like a dirty old woman.
Two more trailers caught my attention. Hunger Games, a book I did read and while I thought it was good, I didn’t LOVE it and never felt compelled to read the other two in the trilogy. But the trailer was actually pretty amazing. I think I might like to see that movie (probably not in the theatre, but all the same, the fact that I might want to see a movie of a book I just liked impressed me). The last trailer was for Cabin in the Woods. A horror/thriller type movie that normally might not be my thing, but the trailer showcased some kind of awesome tongue-in-cheek snark. And the movie is produced by Joss Whedon who kind of excels at tongue-in-cheek snark so maybe his brand of awesome is imprinted on the movie. I’ll look for it to rent.
Now, on to One for the Money. I went into it a bit skeptical. I should note that I don’t consider myself a FAN of the books, though I’ve read the whole series twice. I can still remember the summer, at least 12 years ago, that I discovered the series. I think only 6 were out. I was on a vacation with my ex-husband (well, he was my husband then), in a cabin on the shores of Lake Michigan. He spent his whole time fishing on a boat in Lake Michigan, and I get horrible (horrible) water sickness, so I spent my vacation on the beach. Reading Janet Evanovich (frankly, reading on a beach is my perfect vacation). I’d checked out books 1-5 in hardcover from the library, and carted them (and a suitcase of other books) on vacation with me. Yes, I love having a digital library of books to cart with me now. Much lighter! I tore through the first five and didn’t have the sixth, but knew it had been released. We were staying near small town Sturgeon Bay in Wisconsin, and I looked in both the small local bookstore and the Walmart. Neither had Book Six because the series (and Evanovich) hadn’t quite hit it big yet (there’s a lesson here about the longtail of series, books and publishing). But oh man, they were the perfect beach reads. I continued to faithfully buy each book every June when it released for probably 6 years and then I got a bit weary and jaded. Nothing ever changed, no one ever grew, Stephanie never chose between Morelli and Ranger (I believe Evanovich has since done an interview where she said she never intends for Stephanie to choose. Yes, never. How…depressing).
Anyway. Last year I did a back-to-back re-read of the JD Robb In Death series and I thought it would be interesting to then do a back-to-back reread of the Stephanie Plum series, and see how the two compared in terms of character growth, story ARC, plot, etc over the course of extended series. Though there’s twice as many In Death books as there are Plum books. So I’ve read most of the Plum books twice, with the exception of the most recent, which I haven’t read (with the exception of the Amazon reviewes, which are quite scathing). So I went into the movie with more than a conversant knowledge of the books and characters, but no rabid love, and some rather mixed-bag emotions on the books overall.
That said, what I didn’t really go into the movie with was strong feelings about the actors/actresses chosen for the roles. I know a lot of people went apeshit WTF when Katherine Heigl was cast as Stephanie Plum (which makes sense to me since she freakin’ produced the movie) but I don’t watch Grey’s Anatomy and I don’t recall any other movie I’ve ever seen her in (I’m not much of a TV or movie watcher. I like books) so I didn’t have any negative OMG NOOOO connotations associated with her. Likewise the rest of the casting. I think the strongest emotion I had was of Debbie Reynolds cast as Grandma Mazur. I picture Grandma Mazur as super old, super tiny and kind of decrepit and wrinkly. Debbie Reynolds is just a bit too…robust for me to really buy into her as Grandma Mazur. Both when I saw she’d been cast and now that I’ve seen the movie.
What I liked about the casting: I love love loved the casting of Connie and Vinnie. The actress and actor chosen for these roles were absolutely perfect. I wish they’d have been in the movie even more, though their appearances were about commiserate with their appearance in the book. Ditto Lula. The actress who played her pulled her off very well. It’s really a shame Lula’s role isn’t a major one until later books. I also liked John Leguizamo cast as Benito Ramirez’s scummy “manager” Jimmy Alpha. But honestly, has Leguizamo ever not been good in a role?
But what about the main characters? I actually thought Heigl did a pretty decent Stephanie Plum, with one small exception. She came across as quite charming (though a bit skinnier than I’ve always pictured Stephanie, as I’ve always thought of her as having a bit of a muffin top, possibly) and spunky. I did think Stephanie in the movie came across as even more too stupid to live than Stephanie in the books, but I think this had more to do with the translation of her idiocy to the big screen, rather than Heigl’s acting. Honestly, I think Heigl did a much better job with the role than all of the hystrionics suggested she would. I’ll get to the small exception in a bit…
Morelli and Ranger. I was…meh on the casting. I mean, I think both guys are hot, though maybe the actor who played Ranger, Daniel Sunjata has lips that are bit too full and made him look a little more feminine than I think of RangerBut I’m not honestly sure who the actor is that would personify the Ranger in my head. The actor who played Morelli, Jason O’Mara, wasn’t quite…Italian? Dark-haired/dark-eyed? enough for my mental picture, but he was plenty hot. My problem with the movie here comes with the fact that both of these characters came off as not at all charming. Not even a little. They instead come across, both of them, as arrogant and at times a bit alpha-holish (TM @jane_l). I didn’t feel warm and fuzzy about either character, really, in a hero-type role. And here’s where my small exception of Heigl’s portrayal of Stephanie Plum comes in–she had absolutely no sexual chemistry or sexual tension with either actor. None. Not a bit. Nothing. And if you’ve read the first few books in this series, you’ll know that one thing Evanovich, despite any quibbles I might have with the books, does well is the sexual tension between Stephanie and Morelli and Stephanie and Ranger. Evanovich leads you to really imagine the sizzle and steam between these characters and none of that was translated on screen. And I think that’s the movie’s main downfall: there’s no chemistry.
The other thing I noticed didn’t translate as well to the screen was the undertones of humor that are one of the keystones of Evanovich’s writing. I purposely stayed cognizant of whether people were laughing during the movie and the answer was…not so much. There were only 3 main points were the audience really laughed, and one of those was when Grandma Mazur shot the turkey (a scene in the book that nearly had me peeing my pants but on screen only garnered a few seconds of laughter). But I guess I’m not really that surprised, as humor can be difficult to translate from one medium to another.
Overall, the movie was a fun diversion. I think it’s interesting to note that in both One for the Money the book and the movie, we do see character growth in Stephanie. While she remains somewhat idiotic and too stupid too live, she does carry her gun…and learn how to shoot it. When I re-read the books back-t0-back last year, what stood out most starkly to me in that reading was that Stephanie actually regresses from book one to book two…as in she unlearns skills (like shooting a gun) and general self-defense that she shows in book one (and in the movie). So in the movie, we do get the satisfaction, especially at the action climax of the movie, but also in other scenes, of seeing Stephanie do things that show her growth/learning. In the series, for some reason the author seems determined to make Stephanie Plum progressively dumber and I don’t see movie audiences being appreciative of this (if future movies ever get the chance to be made) so this might be a case where we often see books and movies parting ways and being different in script than manuscript.
Do I regret spending a few hours in the theatre watching it? Not at all. I’ve seen movies where I bemoan the time I’ll never get back. With this movie, I was glad for a few hours away from the computer, to keep me from doing work-type things on my day off. I enjoyed the movie enough to be diverted for a few hours. However, I will say that I’m glad I only paid $6 for it, rather than full movie prices. $6 was the perfect price as an excuse to sit in the theatre and inhale buttered-popcorn calories. A
Would I recommend it? Um…gah. The answer isn’t yes, it’s not no. I guess if I were rating it, I’d give it a 5 of 10 (which somehow sounds nicer than 2.5 out of 5, doesn’t it?) Incidentally, this is the same rating it gets on IMDB and I think “in the middle” is a good rating for this. I can’t say how people who have absolutely no association with the books will feel about it. If you’re an extreme fan of the books, yes, by all means, you should definitely go see it. If you’re a casual fan of the books, wait for video. If you hate Katherine Heigl, well, you probably won’t enjoy it no matter how you feel about the books. As I said earlier, I think she did a pretty good job pulling off Stephanie Plum.
All in all, this is not, by far, the worst book-to-movie translation I’ve ever seen and I’d actually like to see a second movie made, if only to see if they can improve on the sexual chemistry, move Morelli and Ranger to the roles of charming, likeable hero material, and to see Lula, Connie and Vinnie get more screen time. They were just that well cast.
Haven’t read the book? Buy it at Amazon or Barnes & Noble.
Firstly – I’m ASTOUNDED about how much you read. I knew it was lots but WOW!!! Secondly, thanks for the thoughts, because I don’t think I’ll get to the big screen to see it and now I don’t feel so upset about that. I’m not sure the movie will live up to the audio books, which I think rock far more than the actual books. LIke you said, it’s all about the humour!
I read 330 books in 2012. Probably 50 of those (at least) were books I’d read previously, including Robb and Evanovich series. I read a lot
But I also don’t watch much TV (I almost never turn on the TV in my hotel rooms, for instance) or movies. I’m not at all current on those types of things!
But I’m not current on any of that either. The ONLY show I watched last year was Downton Abbey. My only excuse is that writing takes up my me-time, although I still don’t write as many books as I’d like
I went to the movie because I’ve tried to read the first book and couldn’t finish it. I wanted to know what all the fuss was about and the movie seemed like a good way to cheat.
I agree that the movie was likable but there was something missing and I hadn’t put my finger on what till I read your comment – you’re right, there’s no sexual tension. The chemistry is not there.
The one thing I found really curious about the film was how it maintained the structure of a novel in so many ways. Cutting to the unexplained friend character in particular, who was never introduced and did nothing but talk to Stephanie on the phone, ever. In fact, everything to do with secondary characters in the movie felt “novelish” to me.
Watching the movie – and in particular seeing Stephanie’s growth from beginning to end – had tempted me to pick up book 2 and give the series another try. I think, after this review…maybe not. Not if she gets stupider.
@Erin, I thought I’d missed where they introduced the friend, because it was driving me nuts. I’m glad to know they actually didn’t introduce her (well, not glad, just glad it wasn’t that I missed it)
Too robust is exactly the right phrasing when talking about Debbie R as Grandma. Odd casting all the way around – although I love Daniel Sunjata.
I don’t plan on seeing this one in the theater but when it pops up on cable, I’ll sure I’ll check it out.
I enjoyed your review and agreed with your points. I too, think the movie was worth looking at, but didn’t have the comedic moments or the drama of the books. I do watch Grey’s Anatomy and I do enjoy Katherine Heigl. However, she portrays Stephanie as likeable but too ditzy. The sexual chemistry was lacking for both men. Although when Morelli had his shirt off I did sit up a little higher in my seat and I usually tend to lean toward Ranger.
Debbie Reynolds was just wrong on the levels you mentioned. One thing I did love was Lulu’s brown polka-dotted aka Pretty Woman-(Hooker to Respectable Woman) dress at the end.
I thought the best character was the added one…Cho. I mean, smack! “What’re you gonna do?” I would love to see him come back as his twin Mooner. I would watch another movie if they come out with it, but I am reserving the right to cast Sally Sweet and Carole, the chip Lady.
I LOVED that polka-dot dress she was wearing! And I agree, I thought Cho was a fun character, and I actually thought he was going to be the series’ Mooner.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I first discovered the Stephanie Plum books when I was in South Africa and I picked up Hot Six, I didn’t even know it was a series until I saw Four To Score a week or so later. I hauled books 1,2,4,and 6 around Africa in my backpack for 6 months because I enjoyed them so much. When I got home 7 was just coming out in hardcover, and I was hooked. But like you, and many readers, my enjoyment of them has waned. Your thoughts on the movie show me it’s about what I expected, and I’ll wait to rent it. Thanks!
Estelle Getty has always been and will always be Grandma Mazur in my head.
And, to me, Ranger looks like The Rock, but I don’t think The Rock has the silent, intense, violent, sexy-as-hell vibe of Ranger. Honestly, I think Ranger’s a bit like Jamie from Outlander. He doesn’t exist in human form on the planet.
I’ll Netflix/iTunes/Amazon Stream/whatever it when it comes out.
Hmmm, interesting. I will probably go to see it at the movies out of curiosity but I have had issues with the casting since it was first announced. I don’t mind Katherine (though she’s too tall for Steph in my head) but neither of the boys are right (and you’ve got to get Ranger and Morelli right!).
Like you said, Jason O’Mara doesn’t look italian (in my head, Morelli is closer to Aussie actor Vince Colosimo or something). And the other dude is not Ranger. Ranger may be, as Shannon said, non existent in the real world). The Rock is too gigantic. My best pick for Ranger is Shemar Moore from Criminal Minds. Regardless, there needs to be chemistry between the actors. Sigh.
I’m so glad you posted this. I was trying to make time to go see the movie and was bummed because I didn’t think I would be able to fit it in to my schedule. I used to love the books and occasionally still re-read the earlier ones, but “too stupid to live,” is a good way to describe Stephanie Plum. How many times does a girl have to be stalked and kidnapped before she starts to carry her gun and take self-defense classes?
A thousand times yest to @Shannon Stacey’s Estelle Getty for grandma comment. Estelle Getty IS grandma Mazur
I read the books and will just have to pass, pass, pass on the movie. Thanks for your thoughts though. I suspected the humor of the books wouldn’t translate well to the big screen but that’s the risk you take when you get your material from popular fiction novels. Sounds like no one made the story any better or updated it to modern times.
Oh, Keishon, funny you mention that about updating to modern times. Those who’ve read this book might remember that Stephanie steals Joe’s car, and then proceeds to use his CAR PHONE. But in the movie, they quite thankfully cut that part, because she does have a cell phone and his car doesn’t, thank God, have a car phone, lol.
Oy, I read the Evanovich series up to about five, and found myself irritated at how the characters didn’t grow or change or make choices. It was as bad as some of the Japanese Manga series out there, and I finally told my husband that despite the humor in the stories, I just can’t handle a series that stays stagnant. (I used to read them aloud to him, BTW)
He agreed. We opted to stay with Carl Hiaason and Terry Pratchett for our serial reading.
Frankly, I usually have issues when books are made into movies or TV series–it’s never quite as good as what I come up with in my head so I’ve stuck with the printed stuff nine times out of ten.
I saw this last night with a few friends…one of which read the books and one that will be reading thanks to the movie. I enjoyed it. It’s not going on my ‘keeper’ dvd shelf, but I was amused plenty through the movie.
I gotta agree on the Ranger thing. He…SMILED too much. lol The Ranger in my head was more the strong silent type with the, ‘Baaaaaaaaaaabe.” as most of his conversation with Steph. LOL
Morelli…well, I didn’t have trouble with him. Joe is kind of an alpha-hole in the beginning of the books, so it suited. The little scene when they first saw each other and he stole her keys to toss them in the dumpster…THAT was chemistry. That almost kiss. Then it was absent through the rest of the movie.
Overall, worth the freebie movie I had from my Regal card. LOL It made me want to re-listen to the books again. I truly enjoyed the audio versions of the books best.
See, I disagree. I think that almost kiss was supposed to be chemistry. But it so wasn’t in my opinion, because they had no chemistry between them, not because there were no other opportunities in the movie. You can have chemistry with another actor/actress without ever getting close to them. But that kiss… It was just an almost kiss because the sizzle was missing from the entire movie.
No…I suppose you could say it’s forced chemistry based on circumstance. Because they had a few other places in the movie where they tried to show it…when Joe stayed at her apartment for instance…and it didn’t work. The chemistry was missing, that I totally agree about. (even if Jason has some seriously tight abs. Mama!)
But it was the beginning of the movie, and I had hopes for them because of that one scene. Then, unfortunately, it fizzled instead of sizzled. Of course, this is just my opinion (because I happen to be one of the few people that actually likes Katie Heigl. And I really like Jason) but in the end that little three minute scene didn’t hold up against the rest of the movie.
But the setting and overall feel of the movie amused me and followed the book. So, it was a fun way to spend an evening even if everything didn’t all the way work for me.
One reason I don’t EVER want Eve and Roarke to be made into a movie. They will NEVER be able to cast him. Nope…never.
No comments on the actual movie you saw, but regarding The Lucky One…yeah, intrigued a lot by the trailer, then realized what it’s based on and the curiosity fizzled and died right then and there. I really don’t care for depressing endings, thanks.