My Best Friend's Wedding (1997)

Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

In other words,this film is a surreal ride.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

a special film. for the flavor of romantic comedies from the golden age of Hollywood. for the seductive performance of Rupert Everett. for extraordinary Julia Roberts who use , step by step, each possibility explored but her character and for the surprising work of Cameron Diaz. after the wave of chick - flick, it is an useful dose of fresh air. for the smart script, for the inspired acting, for the wise mixture of black humor and pure romanticism. for Dermot Mulroney, hostage of a role who seems not the most attractive but who could be the perfect piece in this energetic puzzle of revenge, emotions, desire and an end who is not exactly typical. a beautiful comedy. who remains, always, real delight.

My Best Friends Wedding stars Julia Roberts,a woman who falls in love with her best friend(played by Dermot Mulroney). Problem is however he is engaged to be married to someone else called Kimberly(played by Cameron Diaz)who Robert's best friend is in love with. So Roberts teams up with her gay friend played by Rupert Everret(who also starred with Diaz in that 2004 animated film Shrek 2) to help her stop her best friend(and the man she secretly loves)not to marry Kimberly. But will she change her mind?Bottom line I really liked this film. The story has been done to death before as in 2008 Patrick Dempsey starred in a film similar to it called Made Of Honor,the cast is good I was always a fan of both Julia Roberts and Cameron Diaz and as for the rest it was pretty good too.Not Oscar material here but it is an enjoyable flick. B+

After Michael tells his best friend, Julianne that he is getting married in four days, she goes straight to Chicago to help him 'prepare'. But she has every intention to stop the wedding and steal the groom from Kimberly. Over the next three days, she tries everything to split them up. Finally, on the day of the wedding, Julianne tells Michael she loves him and kisses him, but unbeknown to them both, Kimberley is watching them. Now Michael has to decide whom he loves most.....Romantic comedy writers in the late nineties must have been running out of ideas when they came up with this, because the film doesn't work in any way, unless your some bitter friendless misery.Which is how I'd exactly describe Roberts character in this film. It's not Roberts fault, she's perfectly fine in her role, it's just that I kept asking myself whilst watching this 'how on earth am I suppose to sympathise with such a scheming, snobby, unhappy piece of work like her?'.And the answer was, I couldn't. Julianne is a totally unlikable character, similar friends,who are just as consumerist savvy as her and give her the wrong advice.My advice to her would have been, forget the wedding, get over yourself, get new friends, and come back down to earth and live in the real world for a few days, you are not that important really......But saying that,the rest of the characters are just as plastic and as false as each other and are a million miles away from 'real' people. It seems to me that the writers believe that everyone has to be rich, live in wonderful apartments, have jobs they love, and have dinner parties every night.Well, that's not the case for 98% of the population of the planet! a little bit of reality would be nice now and again.A horrible film, full of hateful, plastic characters, horrible scenarios, and embarrassing, cringeworthy dialogue.The most anti-romantic comedy. Would make an ideal double bill with Sex and The City 2, just to tell you that rich people can be unhappy too!!!!Thanks film makers....

I'm horribly shocked that this film is considered a romantic comedy, let alone one with many positive reviews.Whoever wrote the script and plot for this film should be shot. Seriously, how does Roberts losing the man she love in the end make it a romantic comedy worth seeing? And while the general consensus was that she was 'evil' and 'selfish', Jules struck me as more love-silly and desperate than evil and conniving (if any staunch negativity from Roberts part was intended then it wasn't well-acted at all). Roberts' character and the opposing guy both showed flaws and imperfections, but such is often the case with troubled people trying to sort out their real feelings in order to make the best relationship decision(s). Also, up until the end her friend acted as if he was secretly in love with her as well so the ending, aside from utterly depressing, didn't really make sense (unless that was also poor acting). That being said, this film would've been much better if they ended up together.