ChickLit (2016)

Nice effects though.

It is a performances centric movie

Better Late Then Never

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Four friends are trying to save the pub of one of them (Tom Palmer or Chris), by writing a so-called chicklit novel, since there's so much money in it. The pub is their place to play dominoes. They do it, but then they have to produce a fake writer, pretending to be the real writer. They ask an actress, the sister in law of one of them to play that role (Dakota Richards or Zoe). It all goes well, until ....The term it self, "chick lit" is derogatory, since it assumes that low brow literature needs the word "chick" in front of it. We could let that go as marketing or recognizability.When Zoe finds fame and glory because the novel is being adapted into a movie, she decides to play the lead herself, a BDSM role with some nudity. Here, the movie really has ethical problems, because Chris (who has fallen in love with Zoe) asks her to not play that role.So, to get this straight: She saved his pub to the tune of 300 000 pounds, and now that she has done so, she has to go back to being subordinate again....just because he can't take her playing a nude role? She, a struggling actress, finally finds success and is independent of men, but now she can't be because he can't take her doing sex scenes? Bizarre. Oh wait no, that's simple hypocrisy.Other than the message, the acting and fast moving plot are fine, so it's a4/10 The Melancholic Alcoholic.

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.

In order to save a pub from financial ruin 4 men - who usually meet for their weekly domino-game there - decide to write a BDSM-novel (which in the movie is currently very famous with female readers) to earn the money the pub needs. Of course, such a novel would ruin a literary-professor's reputation as well as diminish the literary reviews of a literary critic. Thus, they decide to hire an actress who impersonates the writer of this novel. All seems to work out at first, but of course the plot lives from various difficulties.An audience used to over-dramatized Hollywood movies might find this movie rather calm and unimpressive. The characters are all lovingly drawn, the plot is entertaining but won't make your heart race. It's a lovely movie that makes you smile. Especially the music by Alex Britten is an enormous gem in this film!What I personally thought a little disappointing was the performance by the blond lead actress who - for my liking - seemed too detached. If you like a nice afternoon movie this is definitely it. And it surely leaves some good tunes stuck in your mind!

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.