2005/R/Romance
The Q of H once suggested for one of our long car rides that it might be fun to listen to a book on tape [or rather CD... look, I'm dating myself (which is a rather funny phrase by itself... I digress)]. Shopgirl was one of the books that we listened to and I was interested to see how the somewhat compelling story would translate onto film. The verdict? Not well.
Steve Martin wrote both the book and the screenplay, which means that the movie was very loyal to the story in the novella. However, because the book needed to be whittled down to fit in the confines of film, the motion picture was lacking when compared to the book.
Not fair to compare the movie to the book? Ok, I'll take the movie at face value. The question that kept ringing in my ears as I watching this movie was: Why tell this story? A lonely, twentysomething, girl from VT in LA searching for love, finally finding something that resembles it in the person of a 50 year old man, only to learn that it never was love. She has, on one hand, boy of her own age who is inept and broke; and on the other, a wealthy, divorced, older man who showers her with attention and gifts. She falls in love with the older man and eventually realizes that he doesn't, and never did, love her. During the course of their romance, the young man has become just that: a young man. He returns and they fall in love. Again... why was this story told?
The last line of the movie is regarding the older suitor and how he thought it strange that he felt a loss when she left him; especially seeing as he had done his best to keep her at arms distance. Reflecting on how he treated her the omniscient narrator states: "Only then does he realize that wanting part of her and not all of her had hurt them both and how he cannot justify his actions except that... well... it was life." It was life? Pphhhpht. That's almost as much of a cop-out as the incoherent whisper at the end of Lost in Translation. As though it was ok because it was life.
To go back to being unfair, the book has them remaining friends and assuming more of a father/daughter or uncle/niece relationship, something both of them lacked. The movie was unable to include this. Also, there was a secondary character who was devious and disliked in the book that Mr Martin tried to squeeze into the movie. The problem was that, while in the novella she definitely affected the plot, in the movie she was pointless and looked like an excuse to have a girl in lingerie.
Overall the movie was well shot and acted. There were some lines that even Steve Martin couldn't make work even though he wrote them. I wouldn't suggest cancelling anything to see this picture, but it isn't terrible either.
2 out of 5 stars.
4 comments:
That's pretty much how I felt about it. Nicely written!
Thanks for saving an evening for us. I noticed today that Shopgirl was available at the local libary and I thought briefly of checking it out before your review to form my own thoughts. Doesn't really sound worth it. If I'm going to watch someone torn between two loves I'll go with First Knight, or better yet, Sabrina, and I know I'll enjoy my evening.
~Lynn-nore
Just Her Opinion: So the very first thing that bothered me about this movie is that Steve Martin narrates. But he does so as someone outside the story - even though he plays a character in the story. Strange. Couldn't appreciate that. I'm also not a huge Claire Danes fan - but that goes back to the Little Women remake. Anyway, when Marc asked why I thought the movie was written, I basically said that I think they were trying to say that love doesn't always come where/when/from whom you'd expect. In the story, the main character falls for an older, attractive(?), wealthy man who can wine & dine her, and basically give her anything she wants...except the one thing she wants. I think this movie is about realizing that your fantasies can never really match up to reality. I enjoyed the book on tape - but the movie did nothing for me.
I am LOVING the "Just Her Opinion" addition to this blog!
Post a Comment