ChickLit (2016)

I enjoy film and have broad and eclectic tastes and interests both in style and subject matter. I believe that a film with a modest budget can be very successful if the script is well written and structured, has effectively paced direction with well developed characters who are played well. Unfortunately this film has insufficient quantity of all of the characteristics mentioned above.Having read positive reviews however and noted the reputable high quality cast, many of whom I admired, I decided to overlook the low IMDb rating and take a chance. Unfortunately the main achievement off this film has been to rekindle my faith in IMDb ratings.It's described as a comedy. I didn't laugh and the story barely held my attention.

Actually, a fun premise. Several friends, most well read, come to the rescue of their favorite pub which is on the verge of closing its doors. They plan to write a 'mommy porn' romance genre book. A young sister-law actress wannabe is tagged to front the plan as the supposed author.Some great actors in an overall fine cast. Also, some nice belly laughs as the plan goes forward with each of the men writing one or more chapters of the book.The movie goes off track with major plot holes. First, a movie version of a book almost always takes years before shooting begins. Yes, they mention fast tracking this book into a movie but no fast track can turn years into days or weeks. Utterly, ridiculous.The book takes off with huge sales, women shown reading the books all over the city and in droves, a smash hit true page turner including a major TV guest appearance by the 'author.' Now, remember this is about a trashy, sexy romance novel. Yet, we are told that only a week or so later the public decided the trashy novel was 'trashy nonsense', they turned on it and tanked the book. Utter rubbish. This is totally absurd and has never happened except for those few cases where the author committed such as fraud or plagiarism.Of course, if the book tanked a week or two after its release this also contradicts the 'fact' that the movie version of the book had already progressed to actual filming? Plot holes one could drive an 18 wheeler through.One review incorrectly notes the girl/author screws the guys by making deals, for new books etc. around them. However, they are later told she was offered such deals but rejected them.Better ending would have found the girl getting a Hollywood acting gig, her first love, and giving up further writing.

Oh dear. Another writer/director movie (okay, they're not all bad, just most of them.) It's a strange little film with a great idea and some class actors - including John Hurt, bless! Love him but he must have done it for the money - but in dire need of some editing, rewriting, tightening, reworking and all the other stuff you do to make a so-so movie better.Read the blurb and within a couple of minutes of the movie you know what's going to happen. But the actors are good - hooray! - and it's probably that that made me watch to the end.There are some nice bits of dialogue but much does not further the plot or develop character and you feel - like the characters - that you're sitting in a pub waiting for last orders to be called.There are also some unbelievable character motivations and the writer has absolutely no knowledge of how the publishing industry works - particularly the timescale! It might have a message. I've no idea what it is but it is definitely last century! Notting Hill it's not.

I watched this film based on it's tag line. It was a good premise, but the acting wasn't great and it was a little ham-fisted.Plot: several literary types (a gay book shop owner, an English professor, a local reporter and a publican) band together to write mummy-porn. They do so to save the local pub.*spoilers*; obviously they suddenly need to have a female author. Now this could have been a ripe area for exploration. Whenever a woman has needed a male front-man to sell something there's some exploration of bias and sexism in the industry. But that's not even acknowledged.Then there's the front-woman. A struggling actress. So they set her up with fame and fortune and all she has to do is 'act'. But apparently that's too taxing for an actress and she is portrayed as the victim. She is cruel to them, betrays their trust and then tries to financially screw them.In the final scene, she doesn't even apologize but is given a job in the saved pub.It could have been really fun. Like a literary Full Monty. But each step was ham-fisted and obvious. The actress was totally unsympathetic and the four authors were continuously dumped on. It was great to see the gay book store owners, but even that was a little rough. It would have been nice to explore the differences between male and female tastes, particularly as some of the authors were so unfamiliar with the genre.Disappointing.