Synopsis:
A naive young woman comes to New York
and scores a job as the assistant to one of the city's biggest magazine editors,
the ruthless and cynical Miranda Priestly.
Jeff's
Rating: C- : This film was a commercial and critical hit so I began watching
it with high expectations despite the plot's unappealing sound. It was
nominated for several Golden Globes, and one was given to Meryl Streep for Best
Actress. Streep received an Oscar nomination as well but did not win. This is
the story of a bright young university grad, played by Anne Hathaway, who wants
to be a journalist in New York City but instead finds herself in the
high-pressure yet demeaning position as an administrative assistant to an uber-bitchy
fashion magazine editor. At first, she finds the pretensions and
superficialities of the fashion industry amusing and contemptible. Before long,
she decides that the way to fit in and earn her boss's respect (albeit grudging
and silent) is to dress for success. So she receives the obligatory make-over
and becomes even more "beautiful" than she was when she started out. In the
process, she alienates friends, including her down-to-earth--but
Hollywood hunky--boyfriend. In the end, she realizes the error of her ways.
I had several problems with this movie. It was formulaic and predictable.
Hathaway is a likeable actress but not compelling in this role. She endures
indignities during the first week of employment that would have caused any sane
person to tender her resignation. Why would she put up with such nonsense,
especially when she can initially see through the ridiculous nature of the
magazine and its attendant industry? It's not as if she's an indentured
servant. Are we to believe that an intelligent woman with a degree
from Northwestern University, who turned down a chance to study law at
Stanford, is unable to find any other job in the largest city in the country?
It doesn't ring true. It's also silly that Hathaway is described as "fat" by
her colleagues. She's a size 6, which may be large by fashion industry
standards, but she's at least half the size of most American women. We're
supposed to feel sorry for her because she's overweight by anorexic standards?
She's dressing "frumpy" at the beginning of the film when she looks just fine.
I guess I don't get it. Trendy, self-absorbed fashionistas may find it amusing
but it's much ado about nothing to me.
The film tries to have its cake and eat it too. On the one hand, it pokes
gentle fun at the fashion world. On the other hand, it glorifies the
industry by taking it seriously. It would have been better to have genuinely
skewered the shallow phenomenon that is modern fashion. But that would have
taken guts and a true countercultural approach. Hollywood is good at patting
itself on the back while ruffling no feathers that really matter to the
producers, directors, and actors. The rabble in the hinterlands can be
greatly offended because that's a sign of high art and pushing the envelope, but
one must stay carefully within the bounds of good taste and political
correctness as determined by the Manhattan-Beverly Hills elite. "Aren't we
enlightened? Aren't we courageous?" Uh, not really. As usual, Streep is great
in her role. Her underacting as the icy, arrogant editor is effective. It's
not enough to make this a good movie. It's inoffensive and will elicit a few
mild laughs, but it's ultimately a waste of time. It's an example of a chick
flick genre as shallow as the fashion industry.
Alex's Rating: A : I think the
word is... WOW!
This is one of the best films that I have ever seen. It is brilliantly paced,
completely hilarious, a little bittersweet, and packed... Jam packed... with
fabulous fashion!
New York and Paris are such amazing locations to film something with high drama
and fashion.
The acting was great. I was a little surprised by the name of the actress in the
role of Andy Sachs. She is portrayed by a woman called 'Anne Hathaway', which
just happens to be the name of William Shakespeare's wife! How cool!
Hathaway is very good as the naive young girl who rises above the taunts of her
fashionable co - workers, particularly an arrogant worker called Emily. But over
the course of the film, Sachs becomes more confident and self assured, with a
high fashion dress sense.
Meryl Streep was always pure brilliance. She is a fabulous actress, and is
suited to any role she gets. She is, in my opinion, at her prime in this film,
as the elegant and vindictive Miranda Priestly, who is so forceful and strict,
that several of her workers have previously dropped out, and Sachs becomes very
stressed, eventually losing her boyfriend.
The irony of this film, is that Sachs has allegedly landed herself a career that
a million girls would die for!
Devil Wears Prada is quite a similar experience to Sex And The City. It's far
less graphic, but it's just as sharp, funny, intelligent, mature, deep,
emotional, thought provoking, fashionable and just gorgeous.
The end.
Sebastian's Rating: B- : i still don't understand why this movie is so
popular, i can see why the girls like the fasion and stuff.
it just wasn't for me sorry...
The Freak's Rating: C+ : Merryl Streep is wonderful here, but the film is overall too predictable and not entertaining enough for me to recommend it to anyone. Emily Blunt is fantastic as well, but you can only do so much with this material. Streep runs flat and ultimately annoyingly over the top.
comment here
to add your review!
