When did this come out? 2003? Yep, that’s me, on the cutting edge, right up there at the release party. Actually, we watched the movie not too long ago, also a smidge behind times, and since I never read the book, I thought I would read it to see how much the movie differed from the book. I saw an interview with Meryl Streep in which she said the movie was based on the book, but not exactly like it.
I found it an easy and fun read, and that the movie was very much like it and in the spirit of it. The difference was in the realization of the soul-selling aspects for the Andrea character. In the movie, it was more believable, and darker, and realistic. In the book, Emily comes down with mono and is forbidden by her doctor to leave her apartment for a number of weeks, because she is very sick and very contagious. She is the one who tells Andy that she (Andy) must go to the Paris show in her place. It is not the traitorous act that it is in the movie. Andy has a BFF who has become an alcoholic, and while she is in Paris, the friend gets into a car accident and is in a coma and her parents and boyfriend call her in Paris expecting her to rush back to New York, while Andy is sure doing so will cost her her job and career. So the big thing is does she stay or go?
That whole situation felt very contrived. I mean, three more days and she would be coming back anyway. The girl is in a coma. Family and friends are already there for her. The movie situation felt more like the true moral dilemma that it was. So for me, the movie was an improvement over the book.
And Meryl Streep. And Stanley Tucci. The others, eh. They were fine. But Meryl Streep. And Stanley Tucci. Yeah, baby.