good back-story, and good acting

best movie i've ever seen.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

some agreeable light drama and comedy set in the big apple, making nice use of tourist spots like Tavern on the Green and the PLaza Hotel.excellent acting job by Natasha as the woman getting married, flat and dull performance by Michael, as the guy getting married (to another); excellent acting by Olivia, although I was never sure who she was in the movie (numerous wig changes and "accent" inconsistencies) and why she was doing what she did! (the street smart chick shows up in a local watering hole and is surprised she is "picked up" up by an alchoholic!).first half really holds together well ; second half gets draggy near the end (typical for this "genre"); good script but a good chunk could have been excised. too much wistful whisperin' to the stars.the Rock singer Lorraine Mazzola plays "Mindy", though I have to go back and review her scene. about 30 years after "Captain of your Ship". no mini skirt, I know that! :)we have nice, quiet, conflicted people right in the heart of the unforgiving, fast paced, cynical city. will they cave to convention and marry the "right one" or go for it and marry the "crazy one"? *you* find out! :)

I bought this DVD after seeing Natasha Henstridge in 'Species'. Her beauty seemed to leap off the screen. The fate of her male victims seemed an acceptable price for spending some quality time with her. Natasha has remarked in her IMDb biography that she has difficulty judging the merit of submitted scripts. Her appearance in this film is proof of the accuracy of that observation.The Anna Penn character (Natasha Henstridge) is clearly conflicted about her upcoming nuptials. She spots the very handsome Charlie Hudson character (Michael Vartan) in her hotel lobby and deliberately joins him in the elevator on the way up to their rooms. She flirts with the handsome stranger and finds out his name and room number. Anna, realizing that Charlie is in the room directly below her, cleverly creates a flood in his room by overflowing her bathtub. This is guaranteed to make an impression on Charlie and create another opportunity to meet him. Although I would have expected Charlie's bathroom to be directly below Anna's and the flood would not likely be directly over his bed.Charley Hudson is engaged to Claire Parker (Joelle Carter), a shrewd and ambitious business woman who in reality would never even consider him a suitable mate. Charlie is a kept man in his fiancée's swanky home while attempting to write the great novel he is ill-equipped to produce. He is so out of step that he pecks away at a portable typewriter years after real authors have switched to computer word processors. Do publishers still accept typed manuscripts instead of e-mail or on computer disks? Strangely, Claire notices nothing amiss in Charlie's archaic choice of equipment to produce his breakthrough novel. I doubt that the writers of this screenplay produced their product on typewriters, why are they consigning their character to such an obtuse choice of equipment?Anna's best friend Tracy (Olivia D'Abo) first appears with a dark wig in her job in a beauty parlor. In every subsequent appearance, Tracy has this horrible strawberry blonde hairdo that is hardly attractive. Somehow, I would expect a hairdresser to look more appealing than that if she ever expected to get other women to trust their hair to her.Anyway, Charlie really starts to warm up to Anna and eagerly accepts any excuse to keep the new relationship going. Anna now starts to get cold feet and back off on their undeclared romance. This seems strange considering the fact that Anna's mother and prospective mother-in-law clearly despise each other when the three women meet for a luncheon. The effect of this animosity would almost certainly doom any marriage. Anna seems determined to marry her fiancée while clearly enjoying the company of Charlie more than she should.I really wondered at all the mutual hugging the cops engaged in in this movie. No parting of friends or successful accomplishment of a suicide prevention was complete without a lot of hugs. I suppose that cops have become a lot more sensitive types since the days of Dick Tracy. The criminals in New York must look on with tearful approval on the new enlightenment.The conclusion of the film was so contrived as to be unbearable. Anna's fellow teacher reads Charlie's completed novel and relates the plot over lunch in the teacher's lounge. Anna realizes that both she and Charlie have broken off their engagements and are free to wed. The two love birds reunite and tie the knot and all is resolved.The film ends with the wonderful song 'At Last' by Etta James. This song does a lot to end the film on a high note (literaly). Natasha and Michael do their best with such a flawed script. Some parts of the film are even enjoyable, if you don't think too much about the plot. The two leads had detectable chemistry and you wanted them to get together. Let's hope they choose better material if they want long careers.

Look, there's nothing spectacularly offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a typical rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it really has no sense of movement, you feel as though you could get up and walk away at any moment. The production of the movie also has the feel of a debut movie made about fifteen years ago. I'd recommend re-watching a classic movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this shallow imitation. Oh, one other BIG problem...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously disappointed with the way they've made him look here.

I rented this movie because I was big Michael Vartan fan and was shocked to see that they were able make him look very unattractive and unappealing. Didn't know you could do that to a guy. It was easy to make Natasha's character look unattractive - her 80's hairstyle looked bad even in the 80s and her clothes were frumpy. She is great looking and so is he; why the ugly duckling transformation? I didn't see any sparks between them (perhaps the actors couldn't see past the bad makeup, hair and clothing either) and was very disappointed with the movie. If anyone plans to see this, I would suggest being familiar with how the actors actually look (both very hot!) and then watch the movie without your glasses/contacts. I won't even go into the strange accent of the best girlfriend, Olivia D'Abo...