Genres

Visitors Review

oneinthecrowd32 2012-05-25 05:24:29

Meryl Streepe is marvelous!

This movie takes you back to the search for your first real job and yet there is a current flair to the New York picture that just can't be dismissed. The characters are likable and somehow, we want Nigel the shick but kindly design director to succeed. Miranda is the boss from hell but you can't help but think that she knows the fashion business inside and out. She wears her clothes like a runway model and dictates to her staff like a devil from hell. The movie moves at a fast pace but entertains. You don't really get to know Andy's boyfriend but then the story is really not about him. The people that she meets along the way are sophisticated but mostly likable. It's easy to see how she lost her way. I didn't think that I would like this movie but in reality, I loved it.

SidneyPrescott2000 2012-05-24 18:50:13

A Perfect Adaptation

An excellent cast ensemble. A funny, intelligent screenplay from finesource material. Great, restrained direction. Fancy clothes. An awesomesoundtrack. Fish all that up, stick in a blender and what you get? Thesophisticated, "The Devil Wears Prada".Anne Hathaway, Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, and Emily Blunt headlinethe picture and all form together and come out with exceptionalperformances. A surprising uproar of an ensemble. Meryl Streep wasnominated in Lead Actress at the Oscars, but this was clearly amistake. This is Anne Hathaway's movie. She plays the part to a tee,she's beautiful, she makes you identify with Andy as she goes throughthis torture. Meryl Streep is fierce and cruel as the antagonist. Ifthe studio would've pushed her in the supporting category, she'd haveher overdue Oscar right here. Emily Blunt is here in her breakout role.She's the funniest out of the entire cast. Just laugh after laugh andshe doesn't have to be obnoxious out it; what an awesome performance.Stanley Tucci adds yet another underrated performance to his resume. The film uses it's source material here and creates something short ofmasterful. You can watch the picture over and over again because ofit's fresh and hilarious story. The director does something geniushere. He applies a very gentle touch; it fits. The costumes aredazzling, as well. The Devil Wears Prada is one of the best comedies of the decade. It'sflawless; 10

Eric 2012-05-24 13:34:31

The Devil Made Them Do It....I Hope

I guess I should start off by saying there was one thing about this movie I liked: That it did inspire me to work hard and put my writing career as my top priority. That's not the set-up for a cheesy punchline. It did make me realize that you only have so much time to make something of the world and so I start off this review saying so.Now with that out of the way, The Devil Wears Prada is a cheesy, numb, and trite film. I'll say that again: Trite. The movie isn't so much a scathing comedy as it is a self-congradulatory advertisement of the fashion industry. Perhaps I might have liked it a little more if the outfits actually looked fashionable (there were times I was waiting for the clown balls to show up on some of these dresses) or tried it's hand in satire.The movie centers on Andi (Anne Hathaway), a fresh face out of Northwestern University trying to find a job as a newsreporter. She gets an interview at RUNWAY, a fashion magazine (something Andi makes clear she isn't too keen on, but is better than Auto World). The interview is probably the best part of the movie, where we're shown the break-neck pace everybody works, especially when "the Devil" Miranda Preistly (Meryl Streep), is on her way up earlier than expected. From the beginning, Miranda isn't so much a person but a force of nature with no qualities beyond making people feel bad about themselves for things sometimes out of their control (an employee with a cold, in Miranda's eyes, is an "incubator of viral plague"). The most charming of this lot is layout man (Stanley Tucci), but his head is so filled with love for fashion that instead of being the big brother to Andi, I kinda seen him as the older prostitue showing the new one the ropes.This is a good time to explain that this movie acts like Pretty Woman in reverse. We have the sweet, down-to-earth Andi who soon turns into fashion whore to the astonishment of her friends and boyfriend (Adrian Grenier). But you can understand why she would be on edge if someone takes the phone away from her when Miranda calls, Miranda isn't one I would want to be breathing down my neck. But the real question is, why put up with it when halfway though the movie she meets a reporter (Simon Baker) who will connect her to the right people to actually do some writing? As we get to Paris and Andi makes choices that sprial her down to a pit of dispair that we can all see, the movie decides to give us a happy ending it doesn't deserve. If you are going to give us a woman sliding down the pit of whoredom (fashion-wise or not), after a line is crossed (that Andi does without blinking) she shouldn't be happy at the end. She should become the Darth Vader to Miranda's Emperor.To see such an ensemble cast, you would think that there are possibilites for great collaboration. But alas, there was none. Hathaway retreads her wallflower image that is tested and true, if not completely bland. We feel for her, but in the same sense that we feel bad for the puppy getting spanked for making a mess. Tucci, who has probably the juiciest character in the movie, does what he can except that the character requires someone to play off of. Without that, his character is like Hardy without Laurel. The perfect match would have been Streep, except there weren't much that these characters would say to each other. And speaking of Streep, I have seen actors who were in movies that looked like their heads weren't in it. This goes to show the professionalism of Streep that I could tell her heart wasn't here (probably still somewhere on A Prairie Home Companion, I think) but she nevertheless did her best to make Miranda something a little more than what she really was, an obsticle. But there wasn't anything more that could be done with this character and I think Streep saw it just after she put her name on it. It's surprising that David Frankel of Sex and the City fame wouldn't bring the same wit and satire to his feature film directorial debut. He uses everything else he learned from the show except the real reason that show was a hit. The real problem is that his film misses beats with characters, overuses and misuses music on epic levels, and allows his actors and characters look stupid (both in dress and attitude) for no good reason. All in all, this is drab and ugly movie about supposedly beautiful people. I couldn't see it myself. Perhaps this movie should have told itself what men already know: The Jimmy Choos don't make the woman, the woman makes the Jimmy Choos

DonFishies 2012-05-23 19:02:53

Better than I assumed, but Streep's excellent performance does not make up for all of its flaws

Going into The Devil Wears Prada, I was not expecting all that much. Itlooked intriguing, but looked like it was a chick flick through andthrough. Despite Meryl Streep's obvious Oscar nomination, I still wasonly vaguely interested in seeing it. And despite my thoughts to thecontrary, I did enjoy it a whole lot more than I assumed I would.At a price of course.The film tells the story of Andy Sachs (Anne Hathaway), a recentjournalism grad who is down on her luck, and is basically forced toapply to be a personal assistant at a fashion magazine. Despite herlack of fashion sense, evil boss Miranda Priestly (Streep) hires heron, and puts her right through the gears from the start. Even with theamounting stress from Miranda and her other assistant Emily (EmilyBlunt), who hates Andy from the start, she has to continue to workthere, or risk not having a shot at a job she really wants.Thinking I was going to fed standard issue fluff, I was very surprisedby how hard-hitting the film tries to be. Everyone at Runway, thefashion magazine Andy works for, are downright obnoxious. I figuredthey would just poke fun at her, and treat her like trash, but thesepeople are just mean and awful to her. Although it got frequentlyinteresting, I was downright horrified by some of the phrases and wordsbeing thrown around, and was impressed by the amount of pathos thefilmmakers made for Andy's character. Watching her have to run aroundlike an idiot added a jolt of realism that I did not expect to see atall.But almost carelessly, any uniqueness about the film is thrown away inthe latter half when it just becomes a cookie-cutter tale of becomingwhat you hate. The morality tale it slowly becomes is just nowhere nearas interesting as its original "boss from hell" storyline. Justwatching the film slip into this mode was very disheartening, andalmost ruined anything the film had going for it. It was as if theyrealized that their novel idea was only vaguely novel, and just decidedto make the rest of the film dull and predictable to try and make upfor it. It essentially became exactly what I half assumed it would.Another neglectful aspect of the film is the need to continually bringin Andy's friends into the mix. So much is going on with Miranda andthe world of Runway that when these characters continue to enter themix off and on, they just feel awkward and forcefully put in to helpbridge gaps. All three of her friends, Lily (Tracie Thoms), Doug (RichSommer) and her boyfriend Nate (Adrian Grenier of Entourage fame), justfeel tacked on haphazardly, and really stand to do nothing in the film.Yes, they do have a point in it (especially Grenier's character), butnone of them are developed at all, and essentially become useless inthe grand scheme of things.Hathaway is barely developed herself. Yes, she does go through a verydrastic transformation as the film goes on, but her character'sstupidity and naivety are never quite explained. We know she wants toget ahead, but any secondary details are just completely negated frombeing told to us. Her second love interest, Christian Thompson (SimonBaker), only continues to add confusion for the character, and justmakes for some of the most clumsy and angering moments in the entirefilm. Her interaction with this guy should have been replaced with morescenes with her friends and/or boyfriend. On one level, she does fairlywell for herself. But on the other, she just brings the entire film toa standstill, and seems to be channeling an older version of hercharacter in The Princess Diaries.Streep on the other hand, is pitch perfect in her deliciouslydelectable role. When she first came on screen, she looked a lot likeCruella De Vil. But as the film went on, I realized she was so muchmore evil than that. Her barely wincing and thoroughly melancholicportrayal is marvelous, and makes her one of the most convincingantagonists of recent years. Just watching her coldly directingeveryone around her is the key to her devilish demeanour, and it lightsup the film in a way that no one else manages to do. She does trulymemorable work here, and more than deserved an Oscar nomination.Supporting turns from Blunt and Stanley Tucci are both particularlymemorable, if not for working great against Streep, but for completelyshowing up Hathaway at any point they are on-screen with her. The twoof them bite right into the scenery around them, and make theirsupporting roles feel so much more important than they should be. Ihave come to expect this great level of character work from Tucci, buthaving never seen Blunt in anything made me have doubts about herperformance. But thankfully, she delivers in spades, and makes herpresence known. She will definitely be one to look out for in thefuture.The costumes are also very well done as they needed to be. In somecases, they almost seem like they are characters themselves.On one hand, the film works very well in its depiction of the "dog eatdog" world of fashion. On the other, it really feels like something wehave all seen done before. It is disheartening, but Streep does a finejob in her magnificent role to try and make up for its shortcomings.Backed up by great supporting performances from Blunt and Tucci, shereally is the reason the film is watchable in the first place. If forany reason, watch the film for her, and just ignore the storyline.7.5/10.

Anthony Laura 2012-05-23 01:35:42

Great.

After reading and enjoying the book, it went it a little too excited tothis film but came out even more pleased. Meryl Streep's comicintegrity stands above the rest of the film by far. However, Anne Hathaway graces with such beauty and persona that youcan't help but wonder if she really felt confident next to an icon. Thefilm itself could use some story work, and there were a lot ofcharacters undeveloped, but everything is well done, and non-so-predictable.Look for Stanley Tucci as another comic gem, and Emily Blunt whoexhibits such humor with one line, you could almost fall over.The Devil Wears Prada delivers.

creeda1 2012-05-22 17:27:55

Could have been much more subtle

Meryl Streep was great (as usual), as were most of the cast. Onlyproblem was the dreary heroine, with her smug little smiles (obviouslyhas trained on TV - where all emotions have to be underlined, forviewers who are multitasking!). After seeing many British comedies ofthe golden Fifties, this all seems curiously maudlin - even MirandaPriestley has to have a little secret smile at the very end. This is toshow that she too is a good person (in case we didn't understand itfrom the reference she had given to Andy's prospective employer).However, it passed a couple of hours pleasantly - I assume it didconvey the essence of working on a high-powered fashion magazine. Gaveit a 7 for a good try, but as usual they chickened out.

2012-05-14 06:28:18

Boring, not my cup of tea.

I watched it but didn't care for it.not one of Meryl's best.

lastliberal 2012-05-13 22:24:38

The Crazy Life

There were two times in my life that I had the opportunity to chosesomething similar to Andy's job at Runway magazine. When I was in themilitary, I was offered the o0pportunity to work on the IG Team. Itwould have meant certain promotion, but I would never be home. After Ileft the military, I interviewed for a huge law firm and would havelikely gotten the job changing their software to one I was veryqualified in, but the interviewer wanted to know how I would handlepicking up the lawyer's dry cleaning. I wasn't willing to do the joband it likely went to someone who would give up their life for thefirm.The Devil Wears Prada was an enjoyable journey back to those times, andit was a great movie. Anne Hathaway (Andy) was fabulous as she tried tofind herself in a world where she was clearly out of place. I enjoyedher in Brokeback Mountain, and I am really looking forward to seeingher as Jane Austin in her next film. Meryle Streep was fantastic as herboss, and Stanley Tucci deserves a statue for his incredibleperformance. Of course, I may be biases as i thought he was incrediblewhen he did an episode of Monk, and I thought it a crime that 3 lbs wascut. Tracie Thoms had too small a part in the movie, but made the mostof it. I loved her in Rent and am glad to see her in Cold Case.I gave up seeing Dreamgirlsfor this movie and I do not regret it. Iwill, of course, still see Dreamgirls next week.

2012-05-13 02:01:21

Working Girl: 2006

This review is from: The Devil Wears Prada (Widescreen Edition) (DVD) Prada is a thoroughly enjoyable Boss from Hell movie. Great casting, sets, costumes, music. It's all Good. It's also been done before. This movie genre falls in line with the Inspirational Coach and Inner City Teacher films that seem to be a requirement for most actors at some point in their carreers.Anyway, Streep lifts it to a higher level and it's well worth a viewing.

Brian Wright 2012-05-12 18:37:49

Inside look into the harsh-exciting world of high fashion

On the face of it, you wouldn't think a movie about the cutthroat,glamorous world of high fashion—specifically the relationship betweenthe domineering editor of New York's premier fashion magazine (MirandaPriestly played by Meryl Streep) and her second assistant, a standoutjournalism graduate from Northwestern (Andrea Sachs played by AnneHathaway)—would appeal to "guys." Devil has chick flick buttoned allover it. But think again. It's quite the treasure of a movie for all,particularly in the performance of Ms. Streep, who brings to life theboss in extremis we all love to hate. And truth be told, the movie is amainly vehicle for displaying the essence of great acting. You canalmost make the case, as with the Rachmaninoff 3d piano concerto orsome Jack Nicholson movies, that the virtuoso performance is what makesthe piece the piece....For my complete review of this movie and for other movie and bookreviews, please visit my site TheCoffeeCoaster.com.Brian Wright Copyright 2007

2012-05-04 23:00:58

Cute!!!

This is a good one. Remember to stay who you are and not become someone you are not!!!A Must See!!!

2012-05-04 07:05:58

Did they read the book?

For anyone who hasn't read the book this film will appeal to teenagerswho will undoubtedly find it funny, however if like myself you haveread the book you will realise that Anne Hathaway is totally wrong forthe lead role, she is neither an average weight size and even when atthe beginning of the movie whens she suppose to know nothing aboutfashion or beauty she looks remarkably well groomed. The movie is basedon the book in parts but surly that means they should try to castsomeone who at least resembles the personality of Andy Sachs. AnneHathaway's performance is bland and mind numbingly boring. However incasting Miranda Priestly they were spot on with Meryl Streep, she'sstylish yet has an edge to her. The film itself is well shot and isgenerally enjoyable to watch (if you pretend the lead was actuallygood) and will make a lot of people laugh however if you are going toturn a book into a film more time should be taken in casting as anyonewho actually read the book that Hathaway just isn't Andy Sachs.

laura_macleod 2012-05-03 09:57:13

hypocritical, nasty little movie

I think this movie is very insidious and creeps along with all those socalled hidden agendas to apparently expose the fashion industry but infact it plays right into their hands. It is ingenuine and verysuperficial and not funny at all. The characters are two dimensionaland unreal. There is no way for example that a person such as thecharacter that Meryl Streep played would give the Anne Hathawaycharacter the time of day after she left her in the lurch in Paris.Those type of people are as hard as nails and only think of themselves.The way the Anne Hathaway character starts wearing all those highfashion clothes only plays into the obsession with this fashion rubbishplus the way she has to say at the end she has gone down from a size 6to a size 4. If this movie is trying to expose the industry it does avery poor job. This is the first movie that I give Meryl Streep a bigthumbs down, it must be her worst role ever and one that demeans herclass as an actress. And by the way, do you really think that thesekind of people would shower a frumpy little secretary with thousands ofdollars of freebie fashion items just to make her fit in? As if!!!These people are the stingiest out there! The movie is absolute rubbishand it is hypocritical, it endorses the sick world of fashion and themessage it tries to convey goes right out of the window the minute AnneHathaway steps into her Jimmy Choos. Bad Bad Bad. And we know whereUgly Betty came from too!

ArmsAndMan 2012-05-03 04:16:02

Simon Baker plays Matthew Broderick

I've never seen Simon Baker play the same accent twice, but this timewas downright weird. He seemed to be channeling Matthew Broderick, andif you close your eyes, the impersonation is uncanny. But to whatpurpose? To make his character seem wimpy and harmless? Why not playthose qualities as a character trait instead of a send-up? An insidejoke may be afoot.The director of "The Devil Wear Prada" is a vet of Sex and the City,and directed a first feature starring Sarah Jessica Parker, "MiamiRhapsody." Mrs. Broderick may have suggested the directorial tactic, ormaybe it was a fond tribute in its own right. But for the audience, itwas distracting. And it robbed us from what Mr. Baker might've done.No matter. What we came to see was Meryl Streep deliver one of herrichest roles in years. Funny, dangerous, cruel, sad. But not a drop ofbathos or phony sympathy for this devil. Streep has the courage to giveus someone we love to hate. And in a surprising twist, someone theaudience is seduced into admiring.And isn't seduction the devil's first job?

ingres77 2012-04-25 05:05:33

A Wasted Effort

Have you ever seen a film with more talent than it knew what to dowith, a plot that's worked a hundred times, and was based off a popularsource that still failed? Here's your opportunity to see such a film ifyou can't think of another time it's happened.Why does it fail? What possible reason could I have for saying that afilm which made a good profit at the box office, earned Golden Globenominations (and will likely earn an Oscar nomination for Streep)failed? Simple. There was only one character in the entire movie whom Iliked. I hated Miranda (Meryl Streep) almost as much as I hated Andy(Anne Hathaway). The only character I liked was the wry Nigel,Miranda's charming and loyal assistant played wonderfully by StanleyTucci. And he was only a minor character, with too few scenes.Nigel was the one dose of humanity and rationality, and he saved thismovie from it being my lowest rated film of the year, narrowly beingbeaten out by Scary Movie 4. At least I knew I was getting crap when Isaw SM4. I expected more from The Devil Wears Prada, considering thereviews and talent involved.In the beginning of the film, Andy is a naive small town girl who goesto NY to become a journalist. She gets an assistants job for a fashionmagazine, even though she knows nothing about fashion and doesn't careabout it, either. She's just doing it, in the beginning, to open somedoors.Only she gets corrupted by the industry she was so apathetic about, andgets so sucked in that she abandons her friends and boyfriend (whoisn't developed enough for me to care about). She's so far gone, thatshe ignores an opportunity to do journalism when it's practicallythrown at her.So why does Andy throw everything away from something she doesn't evenend up wanting (a career in journalism)? Because she wants to prove herboss, Miranda, wrong. That's it. Miranda is hard on Andy, who almostquits. But after coming to the realization that she hasn't "given ither all", she redoubles her efforts and becomes the best assistantever.She stabs her colleague in the back (and goes to Paris in her place).She leaves her boyfriend and sleeps with another guy (while she'sdrunk, and after she says 'no' a few times). She abandons her friendsand family. All for a job she initially didn't care about, and whichshe really never cares about. She does it all for Miranda.Yet we're given absolutely no logical reason why she should care somuch about Miranda, a woman who never gives her any respect, isn'tremotely likable, and goes out of her way to make the lives of herassistant hell.By the end of the movie, I wanted to throw something at my TV andscream, "you've lost everything for absolutely no reason! You're thedumbest character I've ever seen in a movie of this much potential!"But, alas, it would've been a wasted effort. Of course, Andy finallyrealizes that she'd made the wrong choices the entire time (who'd haveimagined that it wasn't a good idea to throw your entire life away forsomething you didn't care about?), and made up with her boyfriend (whowas wooden, shallow, and undeveloped). Final analysis: avoid.

misko14 2012-04-24 09:31:30

Could it be any more predictable??

I saw this movie together with a friend of mine and basically decidedto be polite, shut up and remain seated (my friend was for some reasonunder the assumption that this movie was good).I didn't like it at all.My biggest problem with this fluffy thing is that the movie is sobrutally predictable. A severely mentally retarded squirrel would beable to give away the ending after 20-30 minutes into the movie.There are really NO surprises here at all. The main character girlrealizes that her ideals were correct from the start and leaves thesuperficial job and goes back to her boyfriend. This is the plot twistin this one :).

ange_rankin 2012-04-19 04:40:52

One of the most fun movies I've seen in a long time!

I thought this movie had it all. I can understand how this movie maynot be a top ten for everyone, but I can guarantee that no matter yourage or gender you will be NOT disappointed. Why I gave it my highest movie rating thus far: 1) it was lighthearted, the fun clothes and sarcastic comments had me and mygirlfriend laughing out loud 2) it had it's serious moments -realizingyour becoming distance from friends and family; realizing what you willand will not do to get ahead in life 3) as always I believe that peopleoften rate movies the highest when the situations/characters are mostrelatable to themselves- therefore being a 20 something female tryingto juggle work and relationship and friends and co-workers I identifiedwith this movie completely. I understand how she felt first starting ajob where no one gave her a hand, I understand how hard it is tosubmerge yourself into a new phase and yet keep your samecharacteristic. 4)Meryl Streep and Anne Hathway are wicked in thismovie, their characters unbelievable realistic Yes the characterMiranda is extreme but when you think about it how else do women intoday's society get ahead? Most of the time they do have to be extracold and workaholics to be taken as serious a man in the same position. 5) the thing I loved most about this movie is that it ended upsurprising me in the end by not making this a "she's really a softyunderneath it all" feel good movie. I thought for sure that in the endMiranda was going to realize what a bitch she had been all the years,then have an epithany and her and Andy were going to end up being bestof friends drinking tea together. I absolutely loved the car scene whenMiranda revealed that she had played ruthlessly to end up where she was( and is that really a bad thing in this society? would it be moreunderstandable if Miranda had been a man? business is business right?).After seeing the car scene I thought the title of the movie was highlyhighly appropriate and loved Meryl's Streep calm portrayal of such arealistically cold, evil and greedy person!Great movie, go and see it!!!

dfroggy1 2012-04-18 21:32:47

Streep (somewhat) classes up a banal movie.

I'm going against the grain of what seems like the majority of criticson this one, I guess. Meryl was pretty good, but I didn't think it wasthe best outing of her career. The costumes were eye-popping, as befitsa fashion movie, but I thought the plot was pretty lame. Characterclichés abound (I don't know if absolutely EVERYBODY in the fashionindustry is as totally ice-cold and self centered as they are portrayedin TDWP; I hope not) and in my opinion Andy's "friends" didn't cut hermuch slack. (I certainly wouldn't have taken the boyfriend back.) It'shard to say if this movie's really a 6, but they don't have a 5.5rating, and it is better than a 5.

2012-04-13 17:28:38

a disappointment

The reason why I didn't give it a 2 or less is because the movie has a couple of good fashion scenes and decent acting. This movie was much hyped up about from critics and audience ratings, so I decided to give the movie a shot. Andrea, played by Anne Hathaway, acts as a supposedly motivated and determined writer trying to get a break into a publishing career by kissing her boss' rear end, played by Meryl Streep. I thought Meryl's acting was excellent. She portrayed herself as a woman of a keen sense of good fashion who puts her career ahead of her love life, even though her kids are somewhat of a second priority. She pulls off her character really well. During the entire movie I thought "wow, she's a major bitch. if i were andrea, i'd quit". Andrea's character is average, the only worth seeing was when she dressed well to try to impress her boss. Other than that, her acting is no different than all her other movies. So all in all, the movie is not that good. I don't understand why the critics and some of the viewers gave it the rating they did.

insomniac_rod 2012-04-13 14:50:07

Watch it for what it is...

At first I was skeptical towards this movie because it deals withtopics that men aren't very interested on: fashion, designers clothing,and fashion magazines.To be completely honest, I decided to give the movie a chance only tosee the sexy Anne Hatthaway. Yes, those big eyes and sexy legs caughtmy attention.The movie itself isn't that bad. It features some decent humor that isnot very common in mainstream flicks. Anne Hatthaway looks very cuteand delivers some funny moments because you don't expect a girl likegirl running and saying "shit" or things like that.Emily Blunt is very sexy and delivers a wonderful comedic performance.She's the second best reason to watch this movie. The main reason hasto be without a doubt Meryl Streep. The woman is the most complete andversatil actress ever to grace the screen. She's just wonderful.The rest of the cast is just OK.The plot has the obligatory moral conscience message and will leaveyour girlfriend satisfied.I can't say I enjoyed it but I didn't have a horrible time as expectedwith it.Give it a chance if you like light romantic comedies or if you are afan of chick flicks. Otherwise, stay away from it or just watch it forMrs. Hatthaway.