View Single Post
Old 02-14-2013, 03:12 AM
Past Tense

I'm shaking like milk. For Valentine's Day we get a spirited affair with a not so dead girl in "Just Like Heaven"...

The supernatural romcom opened on September 16th, 2005. It was made with a budget of $58,000,000 (estimated) and grossed over 48 million during its U.S. theatrical run. It made its money back with profits when including foreign receipts. The film opened number one at the box office, the following week it dropped to number eight.

The feature opened against "Cry_Wolf", "Transporter 2", "The Exorcism Of Emily Rose" and "Wedding Crashers".

The DVD did not come with a slipcover or any insert.

- - -

There was a single exclusive, a gift set from Wal-Mart; DVD with its novelization. The combo sold for $19.96 and streeted on February 7th, 2006. The book was written by Marc Levy. Published by Atria Books, 234 pages. It is a smaller softcover book, not paperback sized. As I recall, this exclusive was also available for the full screen version, same price.

- - - - - - - - - -


As it stands in my collection (1,711 - as of writing), I only have a few romantic comedies. This is one of them. It was a blind buy, back in the day. I saw the trailer online and TV commercials, thought I would give it a go. I wasn't disappointed.

Look, I know this is fluff. And some would argue the worse kind - the pandering kind. *sigh* Don't have much of a defense for that. It is, what it is.

What I took was a sweet and charming flick, that is at its core, predicable. Which isn't a bad thing, many horror movies pretty much are clones of each other - the slasher genre comes to mind. Hell, if you've seen one car chase, you've pretty much seen them all.

The chemistry between the leads were good, both Reese Witherspoon (as Dr. Elizabeth Masterson) and Mark Ruffalo (as David Abbott) did their jobs. The humor was effective, not so much as laugh out loud moments as it was a nice chuckles and smiles. And the ghost effects were about just as you would imagine. Well, better than one of those "Topper" films (did I just show my age?).

No real problems with the movie. But I do wonder why this cost more than forty-eight million to make? The only thing that pops to mind is the price for Witherspoon and Jon Heder (who was much in demand at the time) participation. But even then, that's a lot of money, where did the rest go? There isn't many set pieces, the main being Masterson's apartment where much of the movie takes place. Oh well.

I'm glad that they used Jon Heder in a sparing way. Granted his character, Darryl does move the story forward with needed exposition; he doesn't overstay his welcome. The guy plays the same fellow in EVERY movie he's in; actors Jesse Eisenberg and Michael Cera have made a career out of it - though many would argue they are interchangeable (myself included).

Gonna pull out my Pig Card. This will probably offend a few. Not going to apologize, I own these words.

I do not find women with stretch marks around their mouth attractive. Yes, I know it's not their fault, they're a victim of their own genes. While Witherspoon is pretty and hovers on adorable, the moment she smiles, I kinda lose interest. The thought that immediately comes to mind is actress, Faye Dunaway.

Ms. Dunaway was decent looking in "Chinatown" (1974), but had the stretch marks. Man, seeing photos of her now or ten years ago make me cringe. Those marks get bigger and way more pronounced - that the future I see for Witherspoon. I'm talking about prominent stretch marks, not the tiny ones.

Why am I bring this up?

I'm writing about this because of the DVD cover. She's smiling and those stretch marks are present. Why? As you can see from the film's poster (where she is also smiling), they photoshopped it out. Why wasn't that employed for the cover? My eyes went straight to the stretch marks.

There you have it. This is a short entry, but gets the job done. Happy Valentines Day!

Next PT will haunt you on the February 28th.
Reply With Quote