Letters to Juliet (2010) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
169 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Unexpectedly good
bjones15 May 2010
I had expectations of seeing a nominal quality love story going in. I was pleasantly surprised that this film was a noticeable cut above the average. I enjoyed it a great deal; and judging from the audience, so did everyone else.

A long time ago I realized that the way the best love stories work is to make the audience wish they could be the character on the screen. This movie does this in spades.

The major weight of carrying the film rested squarely on the shoulders of Amanda Seyfried. Other than being very lovely shoulders, she did an excellent job of portraying her character. She has a great range of endearing expressions. I've seen her in a couple of other films that I enjoyed her in, but none better than this; even considering the broader production values of "Mama Mia". She was radiantly beautiful and added just the right note of intelligence, warmth and charm. In one scene where her character described her excellent education, it didn't seem ludicrous coming from her as it has in the past from other actors. I'm looking forward to seeing more of her - and not just because of her radiant beauty either.

The rest of the cast did an admirable job as well. Gael García Bernal did well in his role of Seyfried's distracted workaholic fiancé. Later in the film, the arrival of Christopher Egan as counterpoint to Bernal was handled with better than average skill by Egan. His grandmother, played with subtlety by Vanessa Redgrave, was the focus of the story and has never seemed more sensitive and caring. But hey, fellas, whoever was wrangling the script (Rivera/Sullivan), she wasn't believable saying she was 65 when she's 73. But that was the only off note to me. Finally, Oliver Platt added an enjoyable aside as Seyfried's boss.

Finally, the rest of the productions elements, sets, costumes, locations, etc are all right on the money for the theme and feel of the film; nothing out of place of awkward looking. Excellent entertainment all around.
83 out of 107 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Absolutely delightful film!
ltoner18 April 2010
I saw this film at an early screening and couldn't have been more delighted. The film is charming, adorable, and sweet with many laughs to be had as well. The message of romantic love being timeless and one that can cross many generations was very well appreciated and felt. The scenery of Italy in the film is gorgeous. There are breathtaking shots that make you want to hop on a plane after the film is over and go there yourself.

It was also truly refreshing to watch a film that I don't believe contained a single cuss word or sexual innuendo. (We need more of these movies). You could see this movie with your teens or your grandmother without the slightest bit of concern about being embarrassed of what might show up on the big screen. You walked out of the theatre feeling happy and remembering your own love story -- or hoping for your own love story to come.

Don't miss this one if you get a chance to see it. You will not be disappointed.
158 out of 211 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
True Love does not Have Expiration Date
claudio_carvalho18 November 2010
In New York, Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) is the efficient event checker of The New Yorker and her fiancé Victor (Gael García Bernal) is an enthusiastic chef that is opening an Italian restaurant of his own. They decide to have a pre-honeymoon traveling to Verona, where Victor will visit his suppliers. Once in Italy, Victor does not give much attention to Sophie, spending his time with the meetings. When he decides to travel to Livorno, Sophie prefers to stay in Verona to sightsee the historical places. She visits the house of Juliet, where tourists leave love letters and she finds a group of women called "secretaries of Juliet" that reply the letters. She joins the group and finds an unanswered letter from 1957 from a British woman named Claire Smith (Vanessa Redgrave) hidden behind a brick and she decides to reply the letter. A couple of days later, the snobbish and skeptic prig Charlie (Christopher Egan) visits the secretaries of Juliet and Sophie leans that he is the grandson of the widow Claire that has just come to Verona to seek out Lorenzo Bartolini after receiving the letter written by Sophie. She meets the old lady and they decide to search her former love together. There are seventy-four Lorenzo Bartolini in Italy, but true love does not have expiration date. Meanwhile the estranged relationship between Sophie and Charlie changes.

"Letters to Juliet" is a delightful romance highly recommended for romantic viewers. I have seen the trailer that is a spoiler indeed and I postponed the DVD to watch it later. But the movie is worth, specially watching the performance of Ms. Vanessa Redgrave, who is still a very elegant and beautiful lady and gives credibility to Claire Smith. The witty and sparkled Amanda Seyfried seems to have fun performing Sophie and Christopher Egan completes the charming young lead couple. For those like me that have never had the chance to visit Italy, the journey of Claire, Sophie and Charlie is an awesome sightseeing in this beautiful country. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Cartas para Julieta" ("Letters to Juliet")
36 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
How do you say, "cheeseball" in Italian?
treeline118 September 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Aspiring writer Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) and her fiancé go to Verona for a pre-wedding/business trip, but he's obsessed with work and leaves poor Sophie to sightsee alone. She visits Juliet's famous house, where for generations lovelorn women have left letters asking for advice in Juliet's brick wall. The locals who answer the letters on Juliet's behalf invite Sophie to join them and her response to a 50-year old letter will change several lives forever.

This has all the makings of a charming chick flick, telling an idealistic love story in a stunningly beautiful place. Verona and the Tuscan countryside are so gorgeous, I was ready to pack my bags and go. Seyfried makes a likable enough heroine but she's paired with wooden Christopher Eagan who lacks depth, looks too young, and is a total cheeseball. The two share no romantic sparks whatsoever.

The movie is saved by Vanessa Redgrave as the woman who wrote the letter decades ago. She's classy, confidant, and doesn't look like she's acting. Her reunited lost love is played perfectly by Franco Nero who commands the screen even though his part is small. (Their obvious chemistry is for real; they were in love in the sixties, parted, and only recently reunited and married - what a good plot for a movie!)

It's a shame the story has such a Disneyish fairy tale-feel to it. One knows immediately everything that will happen and how it will end. It was too unbelievable and silly for me, although I think younger people would like it. Recommended for those who love picturesque Italy.
42 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A beautiful romantic movie..
mailmrsraj9 May 2010
Every minute of the film, you know what will happen next. But pathetically and desperately, you will wait. And you want to see it. I wonder, how a romantic heart can understand, wait and cry for that one kiss and one hold of the hand...Tears came and I couldn't stop them. Watched movie with a dancing heart and heavy emotions... It's just another good movie. If you think I said less judge it yourself. You will see it again to feel that wonderful feeling of being alive... If you have such a great heart... I say you must watch. I ended up loving the story. And watched all the women write to Juliet in belief. Call it Santa or Juliet. They know a true feeling finds it way. They ask for it, they wait all their lives just to hear its OK to love. And I want to write letters to those who believe in Juliet.
77 out of 111 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Wonderful Juliet
bassrourke8 May 2010
What a surprise this beautiful and easy going film was. Letters to Juliet is a nice afternoon at the cinema, while doubling as a postcard from Italy. Amanda Seyfried is on a roll, her lovely awareness of roles will propel her into super stardom. As young Sophie, who is engaged to a over zealous chef, her life is changed dramatically when she finds an ancient letter buried in a sacred site in Verona. The home of star-crossed lover Juliet provides serious love aspirations for all who visit. Sophie, a fact checker but would be journalist pursues the writer of the letter, Vanessa Redgrave, then takes off on a road-trip with her grandson in tow to find the lost recipient. The film is lush, sensual on the eyes but light enough to just relax & enjoy. Vanessa Redgrave sparkles and reminded me of Miss Daisy at times. Amanda Seyfried delivers pure delight, her saucer wide eyes had me transfixed. Wonderful.
57 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Unexpectedly romantic and touching
Gordon-114 September 2010
This film is about an American woman who goes to a trip with her fiancé to Verona, where she discovers a 50-year-old letter to Juliet.

"Letters to Juliet" is not an ordinary romantic comedy. It has the elements of a successful romantic comedy, but it is so much more than that. Despite the predictable ending, the plot is still engaging and is deeply touching. It shows two women, one longing to find a lost true love, and another that longs to find the true love. Their desire for true love is well portrayed, one can see that they do not just want love, but they want the kind of love that transcends and sublimes. And to wait for 50 years for that adds further emotional depth, making it a tearjerker. I think "Letters to Juliet" should earn its place as a modern day classic romantic comedy, on par with "The Notebook".
28 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Coulda been a classic, but
TVfan23 May 2010
Really enjoyed this film. A very good story, that had many good moments, one in particular -- if you've seen the film, you know which one I'm talking about. Redgrave made this film. She is amazing, and she gave the story believability. But the film could have been a classic. Two things got in the way. 1) The story was just a little too light, seems like they were trying too hard to make a romantic comedy, instead of letting it be what it was -- probably the money people were responsibly for that one. 2) The two leads were somewhat unlikable, with zero chemistry. She was OK, but he was a Hugh Grant caricature. The pacing of their relationship was way too fast to be believable. I think this story is good enough to be remade, and I think it should be - with a different Sophie and a different Charlie, and maybe a little (please note I said a "little") more serious tone. Other than Sophie and Charlie, I think the film was very well cast.
50 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Let yourself play hooky from housework and go see Letters, it's so enjoyable
inkblot1121 May 2010
Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) is a fact checker for New Yorker magazine, although she longs to be a bonafide journalist. Her boss (Oliver Platt) knows she does a great job in her present position but has no clue concerning her writing aspirations. Lucky gal, she is also engaged to a very handsome chef (Gael Garcia Bernal) and they are about to embark on a journey to Verona, Italy. But, how genuine is her luck, really? Her fiancé rarely devotes his full attention to what she is saying or wishing, being utterly wrapped up in the new restaurant he is about to open. Even the trip abroad, a supposed "pre-honeymoon" gets sidetracked when future hubby only wants to go to wine auctions and such. No sightseeing, which is what Sophie is keen to do. Therefore, she lets her mate go off on his own, while she looks over Verona, especially the "Juliet Wall", where folks leave letters to Juliet for advice on love. Sophie discovers that a team of older ladies compose the return letters and they let her help, one day. It is then that Sophie finds a letter tucked behind a loose brick. What a find! As it turns out, it was written by a young lady named Claire (Vanessa Redgrave) fifty years ago. She wanted to know if she should follow her heart and become attached to an Italian named Lorenzo (Franco Nero) or should she go home to England. Sadly, no one found the letter and Claire returned to Britain. Now, Sophie writes a reply to see what occurs. Ho, ho, ho! Claire and her grandson, Charlie (Christopher Egan) are in Verona in a matter of a few days, with Charlie giving Sophie a tongue-lashing for upsetting his grandmother's life. Instant dislike reigns. But, given the fact that fiancé is still on the run, this new trio, Claire, Sophie and Charlie, begin a search through the surrounding countryside for Lorenzo. Will they find him? And, will Sophie and Charlie stop fighting long enough to gaze into each other's eyes? I say go see this beautifully made film soon. The cast is wonderful, with Seyfried and Egan making a talented and good-looking pair, and the lesser cast members doing nice work as well. Redgrave is very touching as the older lady looking backwards and Nero, well, not only is he charming, he still looks most handsome! The scenery, naturally, is dazzling and so are the costumes and cinematography. The script has some originality, as well as predictable events, and the direction, though slow at times, seems secure. In short, let yourself off the hook from more mundane tasks and trot off to the cinema for this little gem, romance fans.
33 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Ugggghhhh!
chaaa12 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The problem with gratuitously romantic films is that they often tend to alienate those audience members who have a lick of common sense! While there is nothing wrong with a film wearing its heart on its sleeve, it is quite something else to try to embrace an airy-fairy heroine with no sense of maturity whatsoever.

Sophie (Seyfried) is in her mid-20's, working as a fact-checker for New Yorker magazine, living in Manhattan and engaged to gorgeous, passionate chef, Victor (Bernal). Victor is just weeks away from opening his own restaurant and is unfortunately rather busy in the run-up to his launch. When they go on holiday to Verona he drags her around beautiful vineyards and gourmet food tastings (very difficult to sympathise) and she moans and groans until they decide to do their own thing. Sophie visits Juliet Capulet's house where women flock from all over the world to bring love letters which they leave on the wall outside. The plot thickens when Sophie meets the women who reply to the letters known as the Secretaries of Juliet. She soon joins in and becomes involved in a 50 year-old love story involving an elderly British lady (Redgrave) in search of her true love, much to the chagrin of her snooty grandson (Egan).

The plot is silly, but rather fun. The Tuscan countryside is incredibly beautiful which makes the film pleasant on the eye and the plot moves along at a good pace, never leaving the audience bored. However, it is very difficult to villainise the "unromantic" fiancée who only seeks to live life with his feet on the ground. The term "true love" is tossed around constantly but the fact is Sophie has no concept of working through problems or allowing her partner space during a stressful time. She has no time for his passion for food but gets in a strop when he doesn't listen to her nonsense love stories.

This is a silly, fluffy film with a small amount of charm which comes in the form of the enchanting Amanda Seyfried. Her love interest (Christopher Egan) is thoroughly unlikeable and they certainly don't have enough chemistry to suggest that she should give up her whole life to be with him. However, Vanessa Redgrave's search for her long lost love proves infinitely more affecting, and this part of the story is sweet and seems to have more of a grown-up sensibility. Letters to Juliet will probably delight die-hard romantics but it is difficult not to be annoyed by its simplistic and downright naive view of what "true love" really is?
42 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
It's surprisingly a really cute and charming, lovable movie
Dragoneyed36322 May 2010
I have to admit, I was very impressed and surprised with how great Letters to Juliet ended up being and how much I enjoyed it. I was very entertained throughout the entire film with it's interesting story plot and likable characters. Amanda Seyfried plays as a sweet, young, engaged woman named Sophie who finds a note written over 50 years ago by Claire, portrayed by the amazing Vanessa Redgrave, who talks of her one true love Lorenzo, and Sophie replies.

The film starts off strong and doesn't let up. It's brilliantly played out by the actors and actresses and it becomes more entertaining with each second. I loved the whole concept and found myself smiling at so many scenes for how endearing it was. The characters, while not the most excellent characters ever conceived, are very believable and likable to an extent. The actors and actresses make them seem sincere and the directing is good too, as well as the writing.

Really what makes me enjoy this film so much is how entertaining and compelling it ends up being at every turn. I always enjoy Amanda Seyfried's performances and the movie itself is a really adorable and amusing adventure. I laughed, I felt compassion, and I walked out of the theater feeling refreshed and rejuvenated because of how sweet it was and how much it moved me. Really the only downside is that there was a Taylor Swift song used around the end.

While it's certainly not a masterpiece, I praise it for being able to go way past the average "rom com" or "tearjerker" and just be a simply pleasing experience with very fun scenes and a great sense of romance and happiness that I was touched by. It was a job well done, and a breath of fresh air from a lot of trash heaps that are passed off as Romance films nowadays. I suggest anyone who can enjoy this light-hearted, fun and delightful adventure see it right away!
35 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Good old fashioned romance
aharmas23 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Two words: Vanessa Redgrave! This film could have been a light and enjoyable romantic comedy, but Miss Redgraves shines like a very welcome sun, giving us plenty of warmth and love, like in the classic comedies of the 30's. Everything was possible back then...

Christopher Egan and Amanda Seyfried are not bad at all, and they have enough chemistry to enjoy the secondary story line, but she does deserve a better partner in her next time out. Back to Miss Redgrave, after all, she is back, and much like the story line, she has been around forever, but she hasn't been a romantic lead for a while, and this character is not pretending to be another age, or too hip, or too different, or none is revisiting the genre and looking at the complexities of the mind. What we get is a romantic fantasy about two people who might get to have their dreams come true.

What is special about this entry is that the leading lady is charming and wise, tender and understanding, that she has a grandson and sees beyond what the others see. She understands what is like to be in love, what is like to lose a great love, and what it feels like to have a second chance with the true love of your life. In fact, when we see how she has some near misses in the film, our hearts nearly break.

The film is handsomely photographed. It is after all, Italy, and there is much to enjoy as the story unfolds. There is no secret and surprising ending, but a very sweet film, with a fantastic performance, and with much to offer a public that longs for some fulfilling story lines.

May Ms. Redgrave live on...
17 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Wooden Acting + Predictable Plot + Failed Humor
bobbyrock-sandhu16 May 2013
They've tried to make it a classic location based romantic film for teenager girls, but while doing so they've tried to target the mature audience as well with half-attempted tongue in cheek dialogs. For me, this has failed miserably as the whole Brit Vs Americano recipe really doesn't work in this pan.

Amanda Seyfried and Christopher Egan simply do not develop any chemistry on the screen, which gives Gael García Bernal a clear lead in the acting department. Amanda Seyfried is a wooden actress with no acting in her eyes and both she and Christopher Egan are painfully slow with their meant-to- be-sharp dialogs.

Plot wise it doesn't offer any salvation either. The moment Christopher Egan enters, you know what's going to happen. Stereotypical first hate and than love story line. I enjoyed the locations yes, but all in all it's a an avoidable movie with predictable plot.
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Maybe I missed something when I was yawning, but...
dorriebelle14 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
...why did the Secretaries of Juliet need an English translator when all of them spoke it quite well ? Right down to idioms ('cold fish') and such.

As for my review... we rented this from Redbox, and I'd really like my dollar back. I read Harlequin Romance novels as a kid that were more reality-based than this movie. Barely-employed pseudo-writer and fledgling restaurateur - in New York City - can afford weeks-long trips to Italy for a 'pre-honeymoon' ? And where did they find those hotel rooms ? Most lodging in Europe is either youth hostels or is simply tiny, dark, and dingy, with communal bathrooms. But I guess I shouldn't look for accuracy when they consistently drove on the wrong side of the road - even the guy who's supposed to be British did ! I just got no sense of anything but a flighty fairytale out of this whole movie - it sure ain't a 'film' - where none of the actors, save Redgrave and Nero, had any real chemistry together at all. If I had a buck for every time I groaned in realization that, yes, we were in fact headed back to Cliché Land, I could buy my own DVD of this and destroy it.

BTW, did our magical heroine ever eat anything that wasn't being hand-fed to her ? She could sure put away the vino and champagne on her own, though...
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Truly banal piece of film
winthrop_maine13 January 2012
The acting was second rate (except for Redgrave), the plot was unnatural, and the characters were unbelievable -- and not remotely appealing to the extent that they were coherent.

The entire film felt patched together. Rather than developing the characters, their motives and the audience's investment, the film simply told you who to root for and expected you to take it for granted. Perhaps worst, the main character exhibited no laudable characteristics; there was nothing in her actions or intimations that suggested any reason to find her charming, intelligent or otherwise desirable. Moreover, the male characters were simply cardboard cutouts -- you're supposed to like this one and not that one, based mainly on the reactions of the female main character.

Unless you are a teenager that is able to project heavily upon the film to derive your enjoyment, I suggest you let this one pass you by. The movie was forced, shallow and ultimately a waste of 90 minutes.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Breathtaking locations and sparkling chemistry between Amanda Seyfried and Christopher Egan
saadgkhan2 September 2010
LETTERS TO JULIET – CATCH IT ( B+ ) Letters to Juliet is a very simple and pure love story. This is a story about Amanda Seyfried who while vacationing in Italy finds an unanswered letter to Juliet and she story begins when she answers the letter. After few days a guy and his grandmother shows up to see who wrote the letter. After that the journey for the lost love (Lorenzo) through beautiful locations of Italy starts. The movie starts off normal but the moment Vanessa Redgrave enters the screen along with her grandson Christopher Egan, the movie picks up. The movie is full of simple and innocent moments with breathtaking locations of Italy, watching the stunning locations will leave you in Awe and desire to visit Italy immediately. Amanda Seyfried looks gorgeous as always and her chemistry is very enchanting with Christopher Egan. Though, her chemistry with Goal Garcia Bernal is very flat may be it also required for the script. Christopher Egan is one hell of sexy and adorable Aussi Lad though in the movie he plays British. His charming personality and chemistry with Amanda Seyfried is worth watching. Goal Garcia Bernal was OK. Vanessa Redgrave is truly elegant and graceful in this age. Franco Nero suited really well as the ultimate Lorenzo of Vanessa Redgrave. By the way Vanessa Redgrave and Franco Nero are couple in real life as well, isn't that amazing. Taylor Swift's song "Love Story" was a perfect fit for the movie. Oh I love the ending in the famous Romeo & Juliet balcony style, it looks simply adorable. Overall Letters to Juliet purity, simple story and breathtaking locations makes it really memorable and enjoyable.
18 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Writers, Small Business People, Foodies, You'll Hate It
fldelk-124 May 2010
Our heroine is, we are told, such a wonderful writer she thinks she should write for the holy grail for nonfiction writers, The New Yorker, but her lack of concern for or interest in language is so obvious it is commented on by a person who has only known her a few days. "Awesome." The person she claims to love is working tirelessly to open restaurant, his dream and one of the most difficult businesses to succeed in. What does our heroine do? Does she do as much as you can to help him, especially as she wasn't doing anything about her own dreams?

Our heroine travels to an area where thousands of people pay thousands of dollars to tour its vineyards, and she is offered a free, private tour of its vineyards. What does she do? Our heroine finds a 50 year old letter. She knows nothing about the situation, both at the time the letter was written or in the present, yet she writes full of advice. So glad I don't know anyone that arrogant.

My friend with whom I saw the movie said to me, "I don't know when I have disliked a heroine more."

What I liked: Tuscan countryside, Vanessa Redgrave, Franco Nero, the Tuscan countryside, the passion of the fiancé, the Tuscan countryside.

I was first going to say, wait, rent the DVD and watch it with the sound off. A better idea would be to get a travelogue of Tuscany.
38 out of 75 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Pretentious load of rubbish
lsvo24 May 2014
The screen is constantly filtered yellow, the main character seemingly teleports from place to placeand the music drowns out any attempt at half decent dialogue. Amanda Seyfried possesses only the two abilities of staring at her feet and constantly looking like she's shat herself. The plot it rushed, incredibly unrealistic and the love interest's when together are reminiscent of couple's whose lives revolve around their babies farts and if it will rain whilst they eat scones on the porch. After losing the will to live watching Letters to Insulting Shakespeare pun, I can however in the spirit of the films arty-farty nonsense, be thankful I still have my health... just.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The most predictable plot ever.
GilGunderson13 November 2011
15 minutes into this movie you will have figured out practically how every event will unfold; there are no twists, turns, surprises of any sort. Was this a cheesy Harlequin Romance written by a 17 year old girl? Unbelievable settings; everyone is seemingly wealthy, unlikely timelines; letter getting from Italy to ..anywhere so quickly (never mind actually GETTING there!), the appropriate people having died, you name it, it will be found here. Amazingly everyone they encounter seems to know English and having been to Italy I can assure you this is far from the truth. Also just about everyone in Italy appears to be a smoker yet I am not sure I even saw one smoker in this borefest. Extraordinary coincidences abound and clichés are clicheed to death.

Terrible.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Luscious Italy, shame about the film
hopek-111 June 2010
I did not go to this film with very high expectations, but discovered that, as low as they were, my expectations were still too high. Italy is a beautiful backdrop for a load of tosh. The acting was wooden and totally implausible. However, it may be that no-one could have made much of the plot and script. It looked as if someone had managed to secure Vanessa Redgrave and then set about finding a suitable vehicle for her. I have seen this actress over the years on film and the stage and found her to be exciting and intelligent in her performances. This was a total waste of her talent. There are far too many films coming out and more is definitely less as this shows.
17 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
"Juliet's secretaries" would have made a better movie.
riva-910-7970683 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I'm as much a fan of chick flicks as the next person but this is a chick flick I am not a fan of. Sophie is an American magazine fact checker and aspiring writer on a "pre-honeymoon" with her fiancé in Italy. She comes across a courtyard in Verona where women from all over the world are coming to leave letters for Juliet, Shakespeare's Juliet. After following a woman gathering all the letters at the end of the day Sophie finds out that a small group of women personally answer each letter. They call themselves, "Juliet's secretaries". Sophie is invited to join them in answering letters.

One evening retrieving letters, Sophie finds a letter written 50 years ago and decides to respond to the writer in hopes she is still alive. Soon after she is surprised when the grandson of the letter writer (Charlie), arrives in Verona stating that she should mind her own business. Because of her intrusion his grandmother (Claire) is in Italy foolishly attempting to find her one true love.

I was put off by how the character of the grandson, Charlie was written. He was rude which made him very unattractive. The character arc attempted to portray how he is very guarded after his parents' untimely death. It even goes on to mention how he works as a pro bono attorney. He is intended to be gruff on the outside with endearing qualities on the inside. Whatever, even after his back story I still couldn't get past the initial first impression – jerk.

As the story line continues the trio of Charlie, Claire and Sophie traipse around Verona trying to find Claire's long lost love. All they have to go on is his name Lorenzo Bartolini (which they find is quite a common name) and that fact that Claire believes he is still living in Verona. This should have been a vignette instead it took way too long. I found myself fast forwarding through each meeting with a Lorenzo Bartolini. I was bored.

The yawns continued with the Sophie and Victor (her fiancé) scenario. It was predictable, early on the audience is shown how distracted her fiancé is with his own life and aspirations. The fact that it took almost the entire movie before she dumps him is amazing.

A more interesting story would have been of "Juliet's secretaries"; the group of women that answer the letters of the distressed, confused and heartbroken. Who were these women and what brought them to the table to now be in a place to give advice to others? That would have been interesting.

Overall, it was a cute premise, but this story didn't deserve an entire movie.

www.rivareviews.com
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
If you want to sit through the whole movie, grab a good book!
marknbkk18 March 2012
I'm sorry, but I've really got to roll my sleeves up on this one - and it's not because it's a chick flick, or as I prefer to describe, a sheila's movie (I have been known to enjoy the odd one of them over the years), it's just because it's a bloody awful movie.

Now I've always been of the opinion that 99 out of a hundred people can act, it's not that hard and it's basically actors' looks that get them through. Well, if that is the case, then Aussie soap opera's Christopher Egan is that one in a hundred who can't act. (As an Australian I am able to make the observation that his remarkable lack of acting ability put him in very good stead to be cast for Australian TV soaps - and he was.)

Egan's upper class English accent playing the male protagonist Charlie reminded me very much of Lee Evans playing Tucker in Something About Mary - and Tucker was meant to come across as a fake. If anything, Charlie's accent fell well short of Tucker's in authenticity, but unlike the character of Tucker whose accent was funny, Charlie's accent was just plain laughable.

However, to be brutally frank, I don't think the accent detracted from Egan's performance, because in all other facets, that was just plain nauseating. It was just sooooooooo unconvincing that it inflicted a mortal wound for the movie. If the producers had cast one of the 99% of the world's male population who was suitably aged, suitably handsome and who could act, the movie may have otherwise clawed itself up to have been fairly described as mediocre. Unfortunately, it was impossible for the story to recover from this miscasting blunder.

Again to be frank, I believe that the only way Christopher Egan could have been more miscast was if he was given the role of Claire, played of course by Vanessa Redgrave. However, I reckon Egan could have actually done a better job of playing Sophie than what he did of portraying Charlie.

Beautiful scenery and reasonable acting by the two female stars (as I say, who can't act?), the storyline is clichéd and consequently extremely predictable.

It's one of those movies that I could not possibly have sat through, but for the fact I was reading a book at the same time. Overall: I give it an "Uggghhhhhhhh" rating - 4/10; and the producers should think themselves bloody well lucky I even scored it at that!
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Best movie I've seen in a long time!!
stephtk3295 November 2010
I really wish they would make movies like this more often. Im am so sick and tired of seeing movies that are only concerned with being sexy or drunk or just plain goofy. Can we get any movies that are just simply sweet.. The circumstances were cute and yes, while it was pretty obvious how it would carry along.. Who cares! Sometimes just watching it play out is just as cute. This movie was just such a genuinely sweet film. Light and romantic without going overboard. It was just really nice to sit down and actually be able to let my 7 year old sit with me. No profanity. No nudity. Just a very nice film. From a mother and Christian women's point of view I give it 10 stars for its innocence.. Very well done! And I disagree with some of the other reviews.. The acting was not bad and YES the actors had chemistry! =) Also amazing scenery.. Made me want to go to Italy! "Chick flick" yeah if your a big gruffly macho never cry gag type of guy maybe you should avoid it.. he he But besides that No. Not just a
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Tuscany is a good stand-in for Verona
jgarrow10 May 2010
Even though you know what's coming, bring a hankie or two. The women are gorgeous (and some of the men) and wise. The men need a little schooling in the art of love, except for Lorenzo - another of those Italian caricatures who seems transformed into flesh and blood from Carrara marble. The real surprise here is how little of the movie was actually filmed in or around Verona, Italy. Where was it filmed? Mostly at a glorious inn a bit north of Siena, and around the hill town of Montalcino, which is farther south - all in Tuscany. The film is really something of an infomercial for the large Caparzo winery and their various tourist properties. On that level, the movie succeeds brilliantly. The men who are dragged to see it will be fascinated to see where Chianti Classico and Brunello di Montalcino are grown. The women, however, will want to be taken back to Verona (literally and figuratively) to find out if Juliet's house, balcony, wall and statue really exist (they do, although she didn't). And what about the secretaries? They exist, and they really do answer letters. Each year, in fact, they choose the preceding year's best and bestow a prize. Wonder if that's how this movie was really inspired?
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
is this supposed to be romantic???
sh_bronstein20 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this movie on a plane, and I had hoped it would at least bring forth some mildly credible, sweet love story. But, no. The plot is really stupid, and the main character is unbearable. The movie is a complete waste of time.

~~~~Spoilers~~~~~ Here's what I didn't like about the movie...

Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) is such an unlikeable character. She is an immature young journalist/writer who has no interest in her fiancé's life and work, and somehow expects him to lavish her with attention anyway. Because he doesn't, she falls in love with another man, with whom she shares no interests, and whom she will probably cheat on pretty soon. Strangely enough, this character - who is completely unable to have a relationship of her own - is going around Verona telling people what love is and how they should behave... Hello? Is this supposed to be romantic? It is sooo dull!!! Another thing I think was absurd was how Sophie (Seyfried) is supposed to fall out of love from her fascinating, good looking fiancé Victor (Gael Garcia Bernal) and fall for the flat, and fully boring Charlie (Christopher Egan). I think that made Seyfried's character seem even more obnoxious.

I did not like Seyfried's "acting", but considering how bad the script was, I guess it is hard to expect anything good would come out of it. What I don't understand is why an excellent actress like Vanessa Redgrave agreed to play the role of Claire. By the way, the fact that Claire's husband is conveniently dead, and she ends up finding her teenage-beau in Italy, whose wife is ALSO conveniently dead is really beyond corny...

Honestly, I think that the script-writers could have been able to work out a better story out of the letters to Romeo's Julia left behind in the streets of Verona...
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed