Thinking way too hard about The Devil Wears Prada
I skipped the book, but eagerly anticipated seeing the movie over Fourth of July weekend. I can deal with fluffy movies much more willingly than mediocre writing. Life is too short to waste on bad books, I always say -- but for some reason this does not apply to movies. Maybe because movies are shorter. Anyway. Devil Wears Prada the movie was not bad at all, and tons of fun -- perfect vacation flick to see with my mom and sister after a day at the beach (we sent dad to Nacho Libre). Loved the cast, particularly Meryl (of course) and Stanley Tucci.
But, you know. Being vaguely familiar with the publishing industry, there are some details I just can't sit silent on. Curse my liberal arts education for molding me into such an incisive critic. Warning - spoilers ahead.
1. Who, tell me WHO goes on a magazine job interview without bothering to look up the name of the editor-in-chief of said magazine? Especially if the job in question is the assistant to the editor-in-chief? Dear lord, what were they teaching this girl at Northwestern?
2. That isn't how fashion people actually dress. But the New York Times already went over that.
3. Vogue = silly and frivolous. New York Magazine, on the other hand = paragon of intellectual virtue. Wha?
4. Duh! He doesn't want to hire you; he wants to sleep with you!
5. Except for the coat-and-bag-throwing thing, the Devil... not so devilish. OK, maybe a little bit at the end. But still. Andie, you ride around in a town car gratis, for christ sakes, and go home each night to Adrian Grenier -- stop your bitching already.
6. OK, this is the part that really gets me. She leaves the evil fashion magazine because working there is hard, and because she was forced to make a decision that benefitted her while disadvantaging one of her colleagues. And she goes to work at a newspaper instead. Because newspaper reporting is neither difficult, nor does it ever involve competitiveness or backstabbing. Also, newspaper offices are sepia-toned and entirely free of flourescent lighting. Uh-huh.
Speaking of Adrian Grenier (will someone please tell me how to pronounce his last name?) reminds me that my next installment of Entourage is arriving tonight via Netflix. Hoodehooo!
But, you know. Being vaguely familiar with the publishing industry, there are some details I just can't sit silent on. Curse my liberal arts education for molding me into such an incisive critic. Warning - spoilers ahead.
1. Who, tell me WHO goes on a magazine job interview without bothering to look up the name of the editor-in-chief of said magazine? Especially if the job in question is the assistant to the editor-in-chief? Dear lord, what were they teaching this girl at Northwestern?
2. That isn't how fashion people actually dress. But the New York Times already went over that.
3. Vogue = silly and frivolous. New York Magazine, on the other hand = paragon of intellectual virtue. Wha?
4. Duh! He doesn't want to hire you; he wants to sleep with you!
5. Except for the coat-and-bag-throwing thing, the Devil... not so devilish. OK, maybe a little bit at the end. But still. Andie, you ride around in a town car gratis, for christ sakes, and go home each night to Adrian Grenier -- stop your bitching already.
6. OK, this is the part that really gets me. She leaves the evil fashion magazine because working there is hard, and because she was forced to make a decision that benefitted her while disadvantaging one of her colleagues. And she goes to work at a newspaper instead. Because newspaper reporting is neither difficult, nor does it ever involve competitiveness or backstabbing. Also, newspaper offices are sepia-toned and entirely free of flourescent lighting. Uh-huh.
Speaking of Adrian Grenier (will someone please tell me how to pronounce his last name?) reminds me that my next installment of Entourage is arriving tonight via Netflix. Hoodehooo!
posted by MTL at 5:49 PM
1 comments
