My wife and I just came back from viewing the "Ghosts of Girlfriends Past." We went because she is both a big fan of Jennifer Garner from her Alias days, and she finds Matthew McConaughey charming. I went because I enjoy relationship stories.
The obvious Dickens formula was no hindrance to our anticipation of what we thought would be a funny and heartwarming story. So our disappointment in the movie was not due to the formula. In fact, I thought this handling of the Dickens outline was better than the "American Christmas Carol" which lampooned Michael Moore.
We found the movie distasteful on two counts. First, it was vulgar, second it lacked substance. We know the main character of Connor Mead had to be portrayed as a callous womanizer in order for him to repent at the end. What grieved my wife was the sleazy character, Uncle Wayne (played by Michael Douglas), who plays the Jacob Marley ghost in this story. What grieved us both was the portrayal of the brides maids as having male sex drives. Not surprising since the story was written by men.
The lack of substance was in two parts as well. First I found the love that Connor had for Jenny Perotti to be unbelievable and unable to convince us that Connor would actually repent in the end. Second, there was nothing learned about human behavior from the movie to make it truly redemptive. I found Mel Gibson to be much more believable in the movie, "What Women Want" with Helen Hunt. Both actors had more intelligent and substantial roles to play. But I think this is the key difference. "What Women Want" is a film by Nancy Meyers, a woman, whereas "Ghosts of Girlfriends Past" is a film directed by Mark Waters and written by Jon Lucas and Scott Moore .... men.
If you want to see a good movie of a womanizer who repents, rent the DVD of "What Women Want" and see that again if you saw it already.
The obvious Dickens formula was no hindrance to our anticipation of what we thought would be a funny and heartwarming story. So our disappointment in the movie was not due to the formula. In fact, I thought this handling of the Dickens outline was better than the "American Christmas Carol" which lampooned Michael Moore.
We found the movie distasteful on two counts. First, it was vulgar, second it lacked substance. We know the main character of Connor Mead had to be portrayed as a callous womanizer in order for him to repent at the end. What grieved my wife was the sleazy character, Uncle Wayne (played by Michael Douglas), who plays the Jacob Marley ghost in this story. What grieved us both was the portrayal of the brides maids as having male sex drives. Not surprising since the story was written by men.
The lack of substance was in two parts as well. First I found the love that Connor had for Jenny Perotti to be unbelievable and unable to convince us that Connor would actually repent in the end. Second, there was nothing learned about human behavior from the movie to make it truly redemptive. I found Mel Gibson to be much more believable in the movie, "What Women Want" with Helen Hunt. Both actors had more intelligent and substantial roles to play. But I think this is the key difference. "What Women Want" is a film by Nancy Meyers, a woman, whereas "Ghosts of Girlfriends Past" is a film directed by Mark Waters and written by Jon Lucas and Scott Moore .... men.
If you want to see a good movie of a womanizer who repents, rent the DVD of "What Women Want" and see that again if you saw it already.