I watched this movie the other day. Bright, dynamic, interesting story. Visual, fashion, again. The love line was only extremely irritating, the casting actors of M+G for me personally do not coincide, and all this quarrel about the employment of the main character is sucked out of the finger, as for me. Could it have been better? Definitely. But even so, very well, the film is not for nothing a classic.
A strange film, with a strange message, certainly worth watching (at least because of the cast).
To be honest, I never realized I was trying to tell this story. I haven't read the book, maybe that's the main factor in not understanding. Throughout the film, the story flirts with many themes, but none of them fully reveals.
The glamorous and fashionable world in which the events of the film take place is only the scenery of this story. Transfer events to the world of sports or the financial market, then absolutely nothing will change.
The storyline of the main character after watching causes only misunderstanding. All the characters in the film are pure altruists who are completely dedicated to their work, and in this context, even the motif “Go on heads” looks toothless and ridiculous. As a result, the final act of the main character looks unreasonable and even stupid.
As a result, after watching, I had the feeling that the authors were afraid to say and show certain things, because of this, the whole film looks like a fairy tale with an illogical ending. But despite this, this story is worth watching.
Shades always, these bitches can't look, no.
Bob sleek-chic petite, I fit those
En Vogue, I do what you can't know.
I'm runningway, you know they're a side show
I'm first page, the mainstage as I pose
The one dame, the one name that y'all know.
"Anna Wintour," Azealia Banks
Sometimes it is useful to find out from what rubbish even the most unassuming films are born in order to appreciate the work of their creators. The battle of the book and the movie “The Devil Wears Prada” I would christen as a battle of fake and original. Like a before-and-after rubric. And, oddly enough, the pluses and ovation deserves not a literary basis, but its adaptation.
I am not a snob, and before opening a book, I do not place unrealistic hopes on it. After all, it is foolish to expect from tabloid reading a complex narrative structure. The main task is entertainment with a light syllable and simple truths that friendship and love are more important than rubber bands. And if the story is also humorous, then it is easy to say that the author coped with his task. The book “The Devil Wears Prada” falls under all categories of fiction, easy accompaniment on the way to work – a simple girl tries to make her way to the big city, in parallel stunning the reader with details of her personal life, which, like any ordinary girl, is not a fountain, but is understandable to many. The question is another, how well did Lauren Weisberger put out in every point - syllable, morality and humor, so that a full story would turn out from the shopping list?
For me, the great success of Lauren Weisberger’s writing career was working in the office of Anna Wintour, from which she made the most of her own scale of moral values. Because the book “The Devil Wears Prada” can not be called except as a dormant one, even if it is true. What Lauren manages to do is strike a balance between ridiculing the glamorous audience of big magazines and being condescending to her - one has to be the last idiot, well, or a very brave person (like Orson Welles) to stigmatize those who are the main consumers of her creativity.
What doesn't work? Well, let's start with the main character. Provincial Andrea Sacks could safely remain under the wing of wealthy parents, but some inner voice says that it is impossible. She has the rear and comfort, she does not need to scratch her head, how to pay rent and fill her stomach, that is, work for her is not a means of livelihood, she just wants to become a writer. And that's weird. Throughout the novel, I did not find Andrea exceptional intellectual abilities - she boasts about her ignorance of French, spends the weekend in the company of a half-drunken friend watching TV and does not draw any literary parallels (I think that the scene of packing elite champagne is like a parallel to the overdoing of peas in the Plague). Camus is purely my existential narrative. Surprisingly, all (or almost all) characters in The Devil Wears Prada fall in love with Andrea so easily, or sympathize with her, but somehow it’s so hard for me to do that.
Now an antagonist. Miranda Priestley (read, Anna Wintour) - Editor-in-Chief of the fashion magazine "Podium" pops up in the text without fanfare and preludes, but as an ordinary piece of interior, which is used to day in and day out, that even almost does not notice it. Lauren Weisberger does not consider it necessary to immerse the reader in the atmosphere of the fashion world, in the eyes of Andrea it all looks like a garage sale, in which tasteless and outrageous reigns, and the head of this bazaar has a fantastic ability to digest fatty food and at the same time climb into the zero size. Miranda Priestley is not scary, and not at all domineering, but rather a spoiled freak living in a world detached from reality. In general, Lauren Weisberger caused me a psychological trauma, now, looking at photos of Anna Wintour, I will remember dirty plates with fat sausages and cheese, and dirty hands scraping away dried food and wiping them on branded things. What an abomination it is to describe everyday details instead of involving the mind and imagination.
And now the movie. Immediately I want to note the work of screenwriter Aline Brosh McKenna. Knowing what kind of text she had to work with, I can say that she changed it into a completely new material, from which she created a really high-quality thing. With that in mind, I understand why writers strike. The way they sometimes melt the literary basis into cinematic images is worthy of more than just applause. Thanks to McKenna, the film has something that is not in the book - atmosphere, conflict, set and climax - all in the tradition of good old romantic comedies. Vulgarity, dirt, gossip, whining, superfluous characters disappeared. Andrea has the motivation to work in the Runway, and Miranda Priestley has a double bottom. The film was interesting to watch from beginning to end. And of course, in addition to the cheerful script, it is the merit of the actors.
Anne Hathaway continues to grow up and in "The Devil..." carries a little from "The Princess Diaries." Clumsy, sarcastic, smarter than beautiful, she is still able to win hearts with her spontaneity and honest look at what is happening (and what happened in Paris, let it stay there). Emily Blunt, better known to me for her dramatic roles in movies, surprises me with her comedic talent - all the funniest scenes of "The Devil..." ("I love my job, I love my job") fall on her Emily, and this is the only thing that unites both the book and the film - devoted to the patron, she still has a kind heart. And of course, the delightful Meryl Streep, deservedly received a Golden Globe for the role of Miranda Priestley. She's perfect. With one glance, it can both crush and exalt. Everything revolves around her: with one discourse about the sky-blue color of Andrea’s jumper, she crushes her sarcastic ignorance and at the same time fills the film with fashion history, gives him the atmosphere of this art form; the conflict of the film is also built around her character – the undercover intrigues of the leadership are needed to emphasize her strong-willed character, and the problems on the personal front – that she is the same person, vulnerable in moments of weakness. Therefore, the opposition of Andrea and Miranda developed in the film into a more reliable picture - it is immediately clear what Andrea refuses and in favor of what. Screen Miranda Priestley is a 100% devil, tempting, enslaving, but also possessing a daring mind and an iron grip.
So, should I recommend a book or a movie? In this case, you can safely do without a book, but if you want to appreciate the work of the film crew “The Devil Wears Prada” to its fullest, the book is worth reading. My applause is entirely on the side of the film.
These fashionable girls from the world of gloss ... Have you ever wondered how you can spend your whole life on rags? But in the movie The Devil Wears PRADA, we will be shown people who are ready to do anything to get another expensive bag from a famous couturier.
This film is a wonderful comedy about how not to behave in the world of fashion and journalism, and also that not all people have positive qualities.
The main character, Andrea Sachs, just graduated from college, gets a job in a famous fashion magazine. But she does not suspect that her boss, Miranda Priestley, is a tyrant in the flesh who demands silence and absolute submission from her subordinates.
And this is where the real journey into the world of fashion begins, where people are willing to do anything to achieve success - even if it requires closing your mouth and getting rid of personal opinions. But, thank goodness, Andrea throughout the film begins to understand what she got into and a few simple things come to mind.
But most importantly, the film “The Devil Wears PRADA” teaches us that we should not forget about the main thing – about our values and principles, that real happiness is not in money and success, but in what we do for others.
In the end, I want to say that this film is a wonderful comedy, which is not only entertaining, but also has a great moral component and valuable advice.
Cinema makes it clear to the modern generation that it is necessary not to fixate on yourself, but at least sometimes to see friends and not forget about them.
It shows that it is important to maintain your principles and beliefs, and do not forget that the main thing is to be yourself, and not to cast yourself as someone who, in fact, you are not.
7 out of 10
Can we make a movie?
The main character is a beautiful girl, smart and with a 99 level of stubbornness. Such anywhere will make a career, purely at the expense of personal qualities. Goes over her heads, but does it so subtly that audiences sympathize with her. How filigreely the director could convey it! Literally balancing on the boundary between good and evil, giving the final decision to the mercy of the audience. What about the audience? Nothing! They ate, and sarcasm and double bottoms were not noticed!
I had to delete most of the review so as not to illuminate the plot. You know why? Because there are so many double bottom moments in this movie that you could retell almost the entire movie in the process of parsing. It's amazing how many people don't see it!
Try it again, but with a different setup. Imagine a wolf hiding behind the skin of an innocent sheep. And the innocent sheep is our main character.
From the deleted part of the review, I had this piece: “I imagine her notebook, and there is a crossed out entry from her list of “what I would like to do in life”: France, a handsome guy, a date at a restaurant, walks, sex with views of Paris and the Eiffel Tower.”
Think about how she came to this trip and how she left. What she had to do to do that. And how she behaved during the trip.
Remember what her boss said to the main character before they broke up. Miranda is a smart woman. Listen to me.
And that amazing moment at the end of the movie, talking with your eyes, without words. And they understood each other!
And I repeat my question again: "Who is the real Devil here who wears Prada?"
8 out of 10
An official film for Hollywood, there is not much to blame in it, and there is no need.
Just graduated Andy (Anne Hathaway) is taken by the assistant chief editor of Miranda (Maryl Streep) in a fashion magazine, where she falls under her influence and in the end she faces a fairly standard choice that she makes at the end.
We don’t really know anything about the other heroes, except that Anna Ventour was the prototype of Miranda Priestley. Within the framework of the film, the characters do not have time to open up, except that the main character, and to make this series would turn out to be an even more dreary spectacle.
In the bowels of the film remembered a funny thought voiced by Miranda. About how any idea of high fashion eventually comes to second-hand, and to one degree or another, all people, without realizing or even denying, are carriers of fashion. This angle of view is interesting and probably has to do with the truth. Otherwise, nothing was remembered, but it was not annoying either. For the director, a good muscle training, the actors play great because they are good, and the movie is dull.
Movies like this are important to the industry when they exist. For Hollywood, this is another unpretentious film that a sophisticated film lover can not watch, unless you are a fan of the talent of Meryl Streep.
2 out of 10
The film is part of the series “Don’t be born beautiful”, where G starts working in a fashion magazine, with a “terrible” boss who wants her assistants to work normally. If you worked at least as a waiter, it will not be difficult for you to remember everything that this boss requires, but the main character remembers three words and believes that the boss drowns her. She wanders around the boss’ house, even though she is told to leave things at the door and blunts the entire film. This is despite the fact that she herself stated that she is smart and catches on the fly. The "template bitch" curator of the main character as an employee is much better and more responsible, and such independent and painstaking bosses as in the film are extremely rare and they are worth their weight in gold, she shares her experience and never raises her voice, so she did not scare me at all, but admired me, she is rather an Angel in prada ... So, the right message in relation to the bosses would be something like, 'At first I didn't understand her, I thought she was the devil, but after working with her, I realized that she was living her business, she inspired me etc.,' but no, we won't find such a message, except that the secondary characters sometimes praise the boss. . .
As written in other reviews, friends and the young man of the main character behave extremely toxic, believe that she has changed for the worse and became “different”. GG eventually begins to love their business, but none of her entourage supports it, they themselves work in low-paid jobs, count how much money they spent on cheese and insist that Gg quit. And the right message here would be something like, 'Leave your friends behind who are dragging you down, making you doubt yourself, criticizing you, etc.' but no! She meets wonderful people at her job who cover for her and help with 'impossible' things, so why would she go back to her evil, envious friends when she's already known what a normal relationship is? By the way, the main character is considered fat, although Anne Hathaway for this role did not recover and looks the same as always. It could be dressed up and made up under the “fat” but the filmmakers could see laziness.
Verdict: The film, despite the outdated and stereotyped plot, could carry a new and correct message, but it does not carry. I admit that in 2006, people didn’t know anything about self-respect and respect for hardworking people, fat people were ordered into the fashion world, and toxic relationships were the norm. Today, this film loses its relevance, as it does not carry any benefit, only harm. But Meryl Streep in the film is beautiful, but her voice is very ear-cutting, as it was voiced by a journalist, not an actress and it is very noticeable. . .
This is an easy comedy movie, and therefore there is no need to search for deep meaning. I think these films are made for the evening. In other words, to rest the brain from the working day. And yet, I leave a neutral, not a positive review and here’s why.
Each of us has our own concept of marriage, love, responsibility, humor, work, etc. I am one of the types of people who does not accept in any form and in any degree of humiliation, insults, humiliations, swearing and gossip in the workplace. To me, it's like a red rag to a bull. I've been in charge myself and I know what negligent students/employees are. And I had to be responsible for the lives of people, which means that the aurles and force majors were for me a common thing. But I've NEVER allowed behavior close to Miranda Prisley. For me, adequate and real job descriptions that allow an employee to do his work within the limits of physical and mental abilities of a person are not empty words. Before giving any instructions, I will think several times how realistic its implementation is in these conditions. If the task seems impossible under these conditions, then you should already think about changing these conditions: eternal emergency is abnormal. However, there are many in my circle who do not bother with such questions. For them, it is important to simply qualitatively fulfill all the orders of the management in order not to lose their jobs. Therefore, they do not bother with questions such as how realistic the task is. The boss knows better ("the giraffe is big - he knows better"). Despite the fact that the main character can even be understood: she had to endure some time, so that then “the doors were opened.” There are even more people around me whose behavior is similar to that of Miranda. To say that it annoys me is to say nothing. Nevertheless, these people are convinced that they are an example of responsibility and workaholism, which means that humiliation, ridicule and so on are permissible for them.
I noticed that many viewers noted the “toxic” attitude of the main character’s boyfriend. Yes, I would probably agree that there is selfishness on his part and on the part of his friends. It is no secret that many men do not like when a wife or girl climbs the career ladder a few steps above them. But again, I repeat, all women are different. For someone, the attention of a young man/husband is very important and they would rather choose him than a job. To be honest, I was not very annoyed by the behavior of the heroine’s friends and boyfriend, because I see similar cases every day. Some women like patriarchy in the family. You're welcome! What about friends? Again, this is a matter of taste.
In general, I advise you to watch this film if someone has not seen it and evaluate it on the basis of the observed, not on the basis of reviews.
The film is normal, I do not see anything in it that deserves a negative review.
The director showed a good image of a careerist, the screenwriter well raised the naive theme of humanity in Darwinism, otherwise everything is normal.
Toxic Friends is a strange remark, the film by everyone close to the main character tried to show us that she didn't have to change, a toxic father, a toxic guy, a toxic girlfriend. Going against them, she only removed the end, making it more spectacular and useful for her, but still as it should be. Maybe it’s just that on this toxic planet I’m surrounded only by toxic people, so I can’t understand other reviewers, but I don’t see a worthwhile claim here.
The only controversial point is betrayal, it is not entirely clear why so denigrate the heroine, so also with a cliché - she was free at that moment. But even here it can be justified, saying that she completely changed herself, and then returned to her principles.
I come back: the film is quite normal, I do not see anything in it that deserves a negative review.
I just love "educational" movies, especially if the plot is focused on career growth and all that. Therefore, as soon as I realize that I am tired of work and need to change something, be sure to review this film to cheer up and rethink everything once again.
Indeed, the film has a very deep subtext: all the actions that happen to a young assistant who got into the largest fashion agency could happen in any other company from another channel.
"No embellishment" is better not to describe. It felt like I was in this office myself, because the directors were able to perfectly convey the atmosphere of the hard working days of young Sachs. The fact that you put your job above your personal life is a huge step into the abyss! Yes, the main character set a goal to go only forward, achieve success and become successful. But all this is erased when you realize that you are alone. No friends, no loved one, you just lose yourself. There are exceptions, but here is the story that no one ever tried to understand Sax.
The script is very predictable, but that’s the beauty of the movie! Meryl Streep perfectly got used to the role of a strict but fair hostess of the fashion house Vogue. Her chic look, manners - the perfect combination with fashion and luxury.
Anne Hathaway was also able to maintain modesty, grace, even when she was already high, in comparison with her colleagues.
The final is certainly very touching. We must always choose what is closest to our heart, despite money and condemnation from the outside!
10 out of 10
Wait, you got a job at a fashion magazine? The interview was over the phone?
Seeing this film for the first time, I immediately wanted to enter this world - the world of fashion, gloss and chic. Yes, he is not the most friendly and sweet, but something in him definitely attracts me.
The Devil Wears Prada is a wonderful picture for those who want to immerse themselves in this cold-blooded atmosphere. The plot is not very new: a simpleton picks herself up and becomes the first beauty and the American dream. A thousand times seen and the same thousand times passed. But still, in the performance of Anne Hathaway, this story becomes very tasty! I still keep silent about the work of my favorite actress Meryl Streep - she always knew how to immerse herself in the role and show the character from all sides.
Watching this movie, you realize that anything is possible - a great example for careerists - and also realize that we are all addicted to fashion. Remember only that monologue about ' rag of blue' - this is something brilliant that you want to learn and use at every opportunity! This is how you live, thinking that you are unique and your style is only you, and then you realize that everyone has already done for you and invented it, use it.
The world of gloss is cold-blooded and this work proves this: competition here is good, you will not be told a kind word, and you can say goodbye to your personal life easily. Plunging into the work, the main character faces these problems and faces a choice. I won't spoil it, but she didn't make me happy, maybe we're too different.
The film is good and not for one evening, worth it.
9 out of 10
Female suffering in labor relations under capitalism. The image of the devil today: Miranda's business sausage, boorish in relation to the unresponsive of the subordinates (who did not take her away in the case of face on the table, which would be nice) - complete with spoiled, as usual, cubs. The thorny path of the main character to the heights of the selfless qualification required from her; at the end of the film she (small by little, having finally gained a decent sense of fashion and the ability to wear a blazer, i.e., a club jacket), who already has something to be proud of, forcing the evil boss (bewildered by the unprecedentedly stunning results of diligence, sweeping away all obstacles, in the momentary performance of spontaneous - often beyond stupidity - having nothing to do with the production process), she could not even get a vouchat her hand in the field, and she could not even get it in front of the voucher. Judging by the interest in the film mainly female (perhaps under the age of 30) audience, there is clearly something very attractive in the work of the secretary.
As a child, when I watched this film, I really liked the picture, I really liked the main characters. But I didn't like the message: Be what your man and toxic friends want. I didn’t know the word “toxic” at the time, but I felt it was impossible to live like that. That from the mountain peaks she falls into a swamp in which she cannot be herself. Miranda really pulled the heroine up. And old friends were like crabs in a jar who wanted only one thing - that she remained the same as before.
Miranda made the character change externally. But inside, the girl remained the same bright, purposeful nature that she was. In fact, she discovered these qualities even more. Miranda did not climb into her soul, did not force her to change her character. She wanted only one thing: quality work. And the girl, performing it, has grown significantly personally, has become organized and acumen, and not irresponsible and loose, as before, as her boss notes. The heroine falls back because the writers wanted to show that the main thing is attitude. As someone who has been in a toxic environment for many years, I can say that not every relationship is worth it.
The heroine had every chance to build new relationships with people like her. But she was terrified of the loneliness, the frustration Miranda had fallen into for a while. It seems to her that the words spoken in a bitter moment are her real life. She was afraid that she would have the same miserable life. In fact, Miranda's life is far from pathetic. She fully realizes her talent. She can afford to be sincere even with an assistant and not be afraid of judgment. Yes, she doesn't let strangers into the soul, but that's the point! Andy said, “If Miranda were a man, everyone would talk about her being a master.” Miranda also has two beloved and loving daughters.
Andy didn't give herself time to realize that the business world isn't for pink snot and sentiment. She didn’t give herself time to get to know the new people around her, to understand what motivates them. She hastened to condemn them by the standards of domestic gatherings and cute interludes. Like a sheep, accustomed to living in a sheep herd, begins to consider the pride of lions some cruel and bloodthirsty. And he'll be right by sheep's standards. But not by predatory standards. And Andy doesn't understand one simple thing: she's not a sheep. She's a predator. And she successfully demonstrates this throughout the film. Returning to the sheep herd, she turns her own power against herself. And she has yet to find out.
And of course, Miranda is no devil. She is an ordinary person who loves her family, wants to fulfill herself, carefully chooses her inner circle and helps her former assistant find a new job. Like a mother who forgives a bad child. And if this is devilism, we should all learn this devilism.
Morality is terrible and crosses everything, but the film as a work of art.
7 out of 10
I liked the movie. In addition to various details and so understandable to the ordinary viewer, I would like to note the interesting formation of the main character and her final position. Not every film shows a person’s ability to give up fame and a dream life in favor of a dream life, but no longer so rich and popular. Difficult choice haunts the heroine throughout the film and it is an interesting plot production. This picture leaves positive emotions, presents both positive and negative characters, and mixed. A couple of interesting twists help to diversify the work.
The Devil Wears Prada is a simple film, with a good story, enough jokes and irony, serious moments make you worry about the characters. It reflects the injustice and value of hard work in the adult world. The film shows the importance of life principles and proves that you can be happy without the charms of fashion life.
Tell me when it's all going down, that's a good sign of promotion. . .
One of those movies that I am reviewing in order to shake myself up and get involved in the workflow.
Well, first of all, two bright actresses - Meryl Streep (the role of Miranda Priestley) and Anne Hathaway (Andrea Sachs) already, a kind of powerful energy transmitted through the monitor screen.
Second, a movie with a lot of subtext. Such a story could be not only in the publishing house of a fashionable and very influential magazine, but in any other corporation and not at all from the fashion world.
The film shows without embellishment everything that goes through people who ' allowed' career and what happens to your personal life when you put first work and the desire to go only up. And what is there, on this ' top' no more friends and relatives are not going to understand you. They don’t care how much effort you put in and are irritated by everything from gifts to any of your successes and improvements.
The last scene is chic, Meryl Streep, as always masterfully conveyed all the feelings of her heroine with just one look.
When watching a movie, look deeper, a fashion magazine is just a film cover.
Or 'Diary of a non-careerist'. You could call this review to fully reflect in general terms what the film is about and how it will end. . .
To see this movie hit from the distant 2006th, 15 years after the Olympics in Turin and the World Cup in Germany, I was forced by a certain list of films (you know very well about such – there are a lot of them now) and a certain cult status of the film about fashion, which persists with it to this day. No, this tape did not become a fashionable masterpiece, but it is known to many and is revered to this day!
Okay! What is this tape?! By and large, an ordinary classic romcom with standard and classical plot development. With a couple of very important amendments! First of all, it's about fashion. But not superficially, but confidently immersed in it, showing many moments inside out and with due respect for this kind of work and phenomenon. And secondly, it's a very well-tailored romcom. Not quite a one-off clichéd film, and the film is indeed predictable, but very interesting. Quality. Confident and... even useful!
. . Useful, for example, the opportunity to see a kind of embodiment of the American dream & #39; Observe and analyze the formation of 'Fashioned' Persons in a very cool and rich company. The opportunity to see a successful manner of obtaining success in the world of high fashion and in general - in any company in principle. This is another lesson from filmmakers, in which, as in the Oscar-winning ' Obsession with Teller and Simmons, we are presented with a wonderful and exciting opportunity to watch the game / partnership / training / work between a cool aksakal teacher and an uncouth, but very promising student, and such things - if they are well tailored - are always interesting and useful!
Of course, the predictability of the plot is not good. However, the nerve ' irony', dictatorship, devilishness from the character of Meryl Streep keeps the entire film in suspense and levels all this predictability, giving the film a head start in front of the viewer in the form of easy intrigue ... which ends somewhat discouraging ... And even though I personally do not like the ending of the film, he, nevertheless, has the right to life and, by and large, he is correct and favorable for the main character.
This film came to me very much with its heroes, and the fact that it is very interesting, and the sphere in which I plunged - a monologue about sky blue from the heroine Meryl Streep changed my attitude to fashion.
This movie is very good from all sides, no matter what you look at. And the musical part. And visual. And the selection of actors and even the unusual and amazing dubbing of Miranda!
Anyway, I won't bother you anymore! A wonderful atmospheric high-quality light feature film about the sphere of high fashion and the career of the American ' Katy Pushkareva' at your service!
A light romantic film with a fashionable orientation. Trying to prove to the viewer that fashion is important. Manipulative cinema. They didn't prove anything to me.
One of my favorite films is a very controversial project that caused as much excitement as indignation. Nevertheless, it is one of the most popular, world-famous films about career and personal growth.
Like many people, I think the movie The Devil Wears Prada has caused mixed emotions. As a film in general, as a project, as the work of the famous director David Frankel, the creator of "Sex and the City" - definitely, the film is done perfectly and definitely deserves attention. And the contradiction of emotions is caused not by the picture itself, but by the heroes about whom it tells.
To be honest, I wasn’t happy with the ending of this movie. The choice of the heroine at the very end raises a lot of questions for me. She had so many opportunities, so many opportunities. I watched this film several times, and did not understand what guided it, choosing a long-familiar, rather routine and unpromising life.
Many of my friends said that she didn’t want to look like a publisher. But my opinion is that she could have stayed in that position and taken a different path for her personal growth, not become like Miranda. Everyone has their own path. The main character was smart and very acumen, I’m sure she could have built a great career and maybe even become a major publisher at some point in her life. She had all the chances and opportunities to do this, and just one evening changed her attitude towards Miranda so much.
Miranda, by the way, did not cause any negative emotions in me throughout the viewing. She created the impression of a strong independent woman, and even though sometimes she is given the right to feelings and emotions, one way or another, somehow she manages to combine the leadership of a large fashion publication and at least children.
Yes, perhaps with her husband everything is a little less smooth and rosy, but on the other hand, it seems to me, they married at a fairly conscious and mature age, and a person must have known what he is going on when he connects himself with a woman like Miranda.
Few men are willing to put up with a strong woman. And in this regard, I see very strong parallels between Miranda's husband and the boyfriend of the main character. Andy and Miranda may look alike, but to us, Andy’s decision was extremely hasty and thoughtless, and with due diligence, she could have achieved a lot, but chose her own unique path, which she would be happy with – without the involvement of toxic friends and a weak boyfriend.
Sweet superficial, but pleasant dramedy, which pleases almost without pink snot and that is somewhat embarrassing, without a clear meaning. Starring the beautiful Anne Hathaway and the talented Meryl Streep, who won a Golden Globe for this film. The story is about how the heroine of Hathaway Andy, as if reluctantly arranged assistant editor of a super fashion magazine about fashion Miranda Priestley, played by Streep. Andy knows nothing about fashion and wants to become a journalist for a serious publication, and Priestley, oppressive, tough, albeit somewhat fair. Well, almost the whole film about how Andy rubs himself with Priestley, plunging into a fashion career and losing old friends. The friends are childish and pretty porky, accepting gifts from Andy but judging her for changing. Because of this, Andy suffers and reflects on losing himself in all this. And then she gets involved in some murky intrigue and sees how Priestley herself suffers. She does not want such strains and makes a decision that looks like a hepiend, in the style of a fairy tale, which ends with a wedding and a story that they lived happily ever after. In fact, the whole film is such a fairy tale. You can find something even for reflection, but mostly it is a beautiful digging in expensive rags and contemplation of beautiful or talented actors.
By the way, Simon Baker glowed in the film, who later gained fame for the leading role in the Mentalist.
I recommend it for an evening family viewing. Girls are especially likely to like it.
One of the iconic films about the world of high fashion is undoubtedly the Devil Wears Prada. The story wouldn’t say it’s atypical. The girl Andy, an ordinary girl, gets to work in the world of glossy and fashion, while not possessing any skills in this field. In general, I think it is not difficult to determine how events will develop further: at first, it will be difficult for the girl to join such an unusual situation, but over time, from a clumsy simpleton that has nothing to do with high fashion, Andy will turn into a stately beauty with a sense of style.
I will not talk about the finale, as it really deserves to be seen, but I will say that although it is characteristic of Hollywood films, it leaves only pleasant impressions. And although the heroine of Anne Hathaway seems to be the main character, all attention is drawn to herself by her boss, editor-in-chief of the Runway magazine Miranda Priestley, played by the unique Meryl Streep. From the moment when the heroine has not yet appeared on the screen, and the rest of the characters are just preparing for her appearance, we already feel the atmosphere that she brings to the film. Here, due should be given to the charisma of the actress, under which the entire role was allegedly written. At first, Miranda seems like an ordinary oppressive boss, who only gives pleasure to see the suffering of her subordinates, but in the process of watching, we begin to see that she simply strives to perfect every issue of the magazine, precisely in this rigid way managing employees. But you can’t say it was ineffective? She was called the Devil by her eyes. Although by the end of the picture we see the disclosure of her good qualities in relation to the truly deserved main character. I can’t help but note the excellent Russian localization of this character from Evelina Khromchenko, who could not be better suited to the role of a strict businesswoman in the fashion industry.
Of the actors, I can still note Stanley Tucci, who played a small role of an eccentric designer, but also gave her one hundred percent, and Emily Blunt, who was well suited to the role of a bitch assistant in the cruel world of fashion. In general, except for a bright and at the same time harmoniously fits into the action on the screen caste and a quite interesting plot, I can not remember other advantages. But personally, this is enough for me, when on Friday evening you flip through all sorts of films, in the eternal search for “what to see?” and remember that from the revised to the holes there is such a good atmospheric picture.
A world of glamour and a world of glamour... such a harsh world
Beautiful women, lots of smiles, luxurious outfits and interior design of everything and everything. Our whole life is about what? To eternal euphoria, to eternal beauty, to an unattainable ideal.
It's all deception, like a movie. The faces are all made up, devoid of a flaw. Everyone is busy with something important. What are they looking for? Money, fame, love, maybe?
Or is everyone here chasing sunbunnies like squirrels in a wheel? It turns out that life does not depend on beauty and jewelry, on travel and relationships. What is the most important thing?
Nothing in life is more important than anything else, but everything is more important individually. You can't single out one thing. You can not give up only work, forgetting about your loved one. You cannot indulge in love by withdrawing from work. You need balance, you need loyalty to family, children, loved ones, colleagues and superiors. You need to love yourself as much as others. You need to love others as well as yourself. This is a genuine balance of things in human nature.
_
But let's leave philosophy. It's good. It's all good.
What happens if you combine the most brutal sphere and the most brutal position? The answer is “The devil wears Prada.”
If you have never worked as a personal assistant, then this picture can convey to you all the horrors and charms of this position in the hierarchy of the company. Further, it is up to you, however, such positions often open up great horizons for development.
Never do without a meticulous boss with incredible requests and colleagues who only strive to mock your failures. But if you find a balance between the rubble of work and personal life, then you are akin to a wizard.
And only when you sacrifice everything, only then will the doors of your career begin to open before you. The main thing in this process is not to lose your real self and not to break down in the middle of the way. Or to understand that it is not for you and radically change your life, as did the main character of the film, Andy.
To avoid spoilers, you need to see with your own eyes once to realize, and perhaps find yourself.
The biggest lesson of all is to run after your dreams or you will be eaten by a job that pays your rent.
Unexpectedly interesting and healing film ... at one time passed by, thought American cotton, but there is not enough sensible and competent cinema! And most importantly it looks easy and with great curiosity!
You know, there are movies that are most remembered by some bright characters. Even if they are universally recognized masterpieces and are disassembled into various quotes, we, first of all, remember them by individual movie characters. And it doesn’t have to be the main character and it doesn’t have to be positive. “No Place for Old Men” is remembered thanks to the sinister Anton Chigur, played by Javier Bardem. “The Dark Knight” is largely based on the mesmerizing Heath Ledger, playing pure evil named Joker. And in "Inglourious Basterds" is best remembered such an elegant, but so cold-blooded Hans Landa performed by Christoph Waltz. Well, if, for example, the film is average and not remembered, then the participation in it of one such actor can easily turn the film into a must-see. This was the movie The Devil Wears Prada, where Meryl Streep’s acting eclipsed everything else, despite the fact that she played a character that should be taken as a role model.
To begin with, I would like to clarify something: The Devil Wears Prada is not a bad movie, and even a good one. The only problem is that he is absolutely not remembered without Meryl Streep. The actors are good, but the characters are ugly. The script isn’t bad, but it’s not memorable either. There are some beautiful outfits, but I don’t think that’s a good reason to watch the movie. But Meryl Streep is exactly the reason why I watched this work to the end.
So what is the magic of Meryl Streep’s character, and why can audiences like him so much, even though she is cruel and domineering (I mean the character) and not a hero to be loved for her actions? There are two main reasons. One: directly, the very charisma of Meryl Streep. She plays her role so convincingly and so gets used to her image that one can only admire. Her words about fashion, like "You don't know it's not just blue, it's not azure, it's not turquoise, it's sky blue," add to her character's character, making her more than just a sadist who likes to see people suffer. The second reason is the character. She is shown not just stereotypically evil, she is shown precisely ambiguous. As Stanley Tutchi says, she just does what she has to do. And, despite the fact that her actions are indeed sometimes wrong and even mean, thanks to the correct disclosure, the viewer empathizes with her.
Yes, in this film there is the main character performed by Anne Hathaway, but her character pales greatly against the general background. She is, in fact, only a shadow of the much more expressive Meryl Streep. And this is the case when a film can and should be watched for the sake of playing one actor.
Looking at ' The Devil Wears Prada' about a year after the premiere, I don't remember much from there, except, probably, beautiful clothes. Revisiting it now, more than 10 years later and gaining life experience, he made a completely different impression on me. And my opinion has changed a lot. Today we will talk about this fashion picture.
Andrea Sacks, who has just graduated from university, dreams of getting a job in a serious newspaper, but receives an invitation to an interview for the post of junior assistant in fashion magazine & #39. With no other options, Andy comes for an interview with the editor himself - the influential and oppressive Miranda Prisley, who unexpectedly hires Andy. Work begins like hell - Miranda requires considerable dedication, accuracy in the performance of work and sometimes impossible errands, which will very seriously affect Andy herself, her style in clothes, as well as much in her life.
If 13 years ago I thought it was a film about the world of fashion, beautiful clothes and how, thanks to these two details, an ordinary girl turns into a beauty. However, time and experience change a lot in our worldview. Therefore, now I first of all see one of the main themes of the film the instructions for finding a job for your first job. After all, the heroine makes many mistakes when applying for a job and during the first months that we can make. But these mistakes can be completely avoided and faster to achieve success - for example, going to an interview, it is worthwhile to work hard and learn about the place where you are interviewed, and, if possible, about the people who work there. Or, when you have already been hired, you need to take the work seriously and try to join the process, even if there are no plans to stay for a long time, rather than show the opposite. After all, when Andy corrects these mistakes, work becomes no longer so painful, even joyful.
However, the first thing we pay attention to is the alluring, brilliant and enchanted world of a fashion magazine, which, despite its bright glossy cover, hides endless brainstorming, impossible demands of the editor and painful search for new ideas. And despite all this, after watching the film, you want to at least briefly get into this world - to look at spectacular photo shoots, be the first to see the new collection of the famous fashion designer, visit fashion parties and, of course, try on all these luxurious outfits that the heroines change almost every minute, and for which it is worth not eating, exquisite shoes from designers with a world name, and famous accessories, especially Prada purse. The film "David Frankel" shows us this world of fashion without embellishment and softening of tones, as it really is, and still want at least one eye to look there, at least for a couple of minutes to become part of it.
The main character of the film is a young girl Andrea Sachs, or just Andy, who has just graduated from university and dreams of becoming a journalist of famous magazines in New York. But suddenly she gets a job as a junior assistant - just errand girls - at the fashion magazine Runway. Played the heroine charming and sweet Anne Hathaway, who masterfully embodied Andy on the screen, which at first seemed too young, inexperienced and clumsy, but who was able to adapt to this rhythm of life, find a sense of style, and his perseverance and hard work was able to earn the approval of his harsh boss. Of course, many viewers had questions about her decision at the end of the film - I just shrug my shoulders and think that everyone has their own choice (and everyone will make their own).
Although Andy is listed as the main character of the film, she is almost always eclipsed (and every character in the film) by Miranda Prisley. The editor-in-chief of the Podium, which is deservedly called the Devil. Starting with the first scene, where one sentence about Miranda's arrival in the office starts a huge commotion, where everyone tries not to catch her eye once again, or when she gives everyone errands without the slightest hesitation once, or reprimands the employee, never raising her voice, or demands that the fittings be postponed to an earlier time, and then she is outraged that nothing is ready, or she will express her disapproval only by clenching her lips... Miranda Prisley is both intimidating and impressive, makes herself afraid and respected, and Maryl Streep is simply gorgeous in this image!
In secondary roles appeared Emilie Blunt, who played Emily - bitchy senior assistant Miranda, who looks down on people, is ready to tolerate all the demands of Miranda and starve for a trip to Paris for Fashion Week; and Stanley Tucci Nigel, Creative Director of the Runway, Miranda's closest supporter, who becomes a fashion consultant for Andy and then one of her friends.
To sum up, a decade later, the Devil Wears Prada took on a new meaning for me, making me see some of the characters in a new light. And this property is not often found in modern cinema. This is why I think the film is better.
The main thing is not to lose toxic friends and a guy, the rest is small things.
I watched this movie 10 years ago as a teenager and thought it was a smart and correct movie. The heroine went the way, remained herself, chose what is truly important and renounced labels and rags and in favor of simple human happiness.
Years later, I decided to watch it on Friday night with a glass of wine. This movie made me very angry.
I won’t even pay much attention to clichés like: ' smart simpleton gets into the world of high fashion, where instantly turns into a beautiful swan, loses weight by two sizes and achieves unprecedented success, overtaking everyone who lives on this topic for years' - it’s not even funny, but the film does not claim script awards.
The problem that I saw in him only now is an attempt to pass off a terrible pattern of behavior as good, true.
I will not retell the plot, there are enough reviews without me, and the film is already 15 years old, everyone who wanted to have already seen. I only note that at the end of our heroine Andy understands everything, leaves the remaining boss, returns to his former life and happily goes into the credits.
And no matter what, a nice naive movie for the evening. Only here is what is good in giving up everything for the sake of relations with a toxic hysterical man, who, instead of supporting his beloved girl, helps and cheers, offends and arranges tantrums, as well as friends who rejoice in branded bags and cosmetics received on the ball, but almost according to them, immediately wind up a classic record: ' TI more nitAkaya tI İzmina I HATYu KaK Ranishe'
Moral: 'Go your way, follow your purpose, and live your life' it's OK, it's beautiful, it's right. But moral: 'Hold on to your toxic friends and abusive man, because they won't say shit' - terrible.
In short, the film is not tense, you can watch, but when I saw the moment at the end where the heroine reconciles with her ex, I paused and came to write a review. A terrible example, girls, if your boyfriend is a complex schmo, unable to rejoice in your successes - send him further.
5 out of 10
Well, I haven’t written a review of the KP for a long time (and the last time was almost 10 years ago), but revising this film also flooded many years later. . .
This evening I was thinking about watching the movie. Recently, this home theater service attracted me.
(Little remark for admins: your service out of all available to the average viewer came to me the most.) Please expand the base of movies, series and I will be yours forever.
The proposed films and TV series did not inspire optimism and suddenly I came across this work. The cover and familiar actors in the cast did not allow to pass by and here ...
One is caste. The beautiful Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci and Anne Hathaway (noticed how much 'E'?) created a beautiful acting trio in the narrative. In short, why do I love these actors?
Meryl Streep – in this role, as in all previous ones (at least from those I have seen) carries his grace, perfection, and in general, how good. The image of a business woman who does not tolerate the mistakes of subordinates and the fashion industry guru succeeded her to fame. I love how she presents her characters - sensually, tenderly, and despite her age, with wild sexuality and femininity. Thank you for her performance. By the way, the translation of this character from Evelina Khromchenko, hit - 10 out of 10.
Anne Hathaway is gentle, young, beautiful. The transformation of a young simpleton into a confident, fashionable and mature (morally) girl showed well. I used to like it in a lot of movies, but there’s a jump from Princess Diaries to Cat Woman. Good, but now I like her images much less than in early filmography.
Stanley Tucci is a genius, even in a small role he was able to live his character, he fell in love even years later. I remember originally from the film 'Sweet Bones' so I can’t help but mention his performance. Talent.
The rest of the caste perfectly complements the solo characters, I can not say anything bad.
All caste. What about the story?
The plot is strangely banal. I guess this movie came to me because I was in this situation too, albeit without the fashion industry. A young smart girl comes into a huge company - the engine of the industry and tries to prove that she is not like everyone else. Not stupid, executive, responsible. But no one appreciates this and she has to mimic - to become fashionable, acumen, sometimes tough and anticipate the wishes of the authorities.
How will it end? Look, the end is classic (it's Hollywood). But the atmosphere of the film is memorable. After so many years I watch it with pleasure and put fat ' +'. Undoubtedly, the film looks with interest and in one breath.
Verdict: If I'm allowed to make a verdict, I'll say so. It is worth watching, the film is shot competently, the actors are good, the direction is interesting, the picture aesthetically delivers. Once killed them the evening, as nothing special, and then returned, and to review interesting. Anyway, I recommend it.