Screen Scene: “27 Dresses”

At first glance, “27 Dresses” seems original enough. However, although the characters’ names and the movie poster may be something new, unfortunately most of this movie seems to be something borrowed from romantic comedies of yore.

First off, our heroine is a self-sacrificing workaholic who loves weddings but is so busy planning for everyone else’s big day, she can’t get around to finding her own Mr. Right. Sound familiar to a certain January hit romantic comedy from about seven years earlier? The only difference is that “27 Dresses'” Jane (Katherine Heigl) plans the wedding as the bridesmaid, and Jennifer Lopez’s character in 2001’s “The Wedding Planner” is smart enough to charge for her wedding-related services.

Both women also have a trusty, witty sidekick always urging them to take the plunge and have some fun. In fact both are even played by actress Judy Greer, who shines as the blunt yet sincere Casey. The sidekick is important since she serves as the closest thing our main character has to feminine intuition, since both main characters have lost their mothers at extremely young ages. Most importantly, they both stumble upon their own respective McDreamies in the same way at very similar inopportune moments. Mary (Lopez) is busy planning the biggest wedding of her career when she almost gets hit by a car, hits her head on the pavement, and is rescued by her future one-and-only. In “27 Dresses,” Jane gets mauled over by desperate female wedding guests trying to catch the bouquet, hits her head, and then is immediately rescued by Kevin (James Marsden) within days of finding out her sister is set to marry her boss/longtime object of affection.

Basically, I could go on and on with the similarities. “27 Dresses” also loses some major points because of how far-fetched some of the film’s smaller details are. Is Jane really so afraid of saying “no” that she agrees to be the bridesmaid in two different weddings on the same exact night, which is how the movie starts out? The rest of the film portrays Jane with much more common sense, but this initial impression of the woman we’re supposed to root for makes cheering that much harder. Luckily, it’s the performances and specifically the comedic talents and chemistry of leads Heigl and Marsden that save this movie from being labeled a slightly unbelievable, barely veiled “copycat.”

Emmy-winner Heigl puts a more intelligent and confident twist on the damsel-in-distress role than her female lead predecessors. And just as in last fall’s hit “Enchanted,” Marsden sparkles on the big screen, having as much fun as possible with his seemingly predictable, cookie-cutter role as the cynical yet sentimental nice guy. The ending also keeps the film above water with a more realistic third act for the subplot of Jane’s little sister’s marriage to her boss (blandly portrayed by Ed Burns).

At the end of the day, there is a method to this madness, a reason why this type of film pops up over and over again in only slightly different reincarnations: it’s the perfect popcorn flick. It’s light on thinking, heavy on laughter, and there is obviously and unfortunately a certain amount of relatability to the people-pleaser who can’t find time to look out for her own well-being in our eat-or-get-eaten 24/7 world.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *