Cute plot, if very predictable. Nonetheless, the witty banter between Heigl and Marsden is endearing and fun. Some parts were purely fluff, though, without advancing the plot.

A rom com that starts off in normal, dull rom com territory, then Bam, surprises me by being actually quite good - could it be? And then BAM again, the ruiny monster is here to crush me under his big ruiny feet, and the film is rubbish, and that's e... (read more) A rom com that starts off in normal, dull rom com territory, then Bam, surprises me by being actually quite good - could it be? And then BAM again, the ruiny monster is here to crush me under his big ruiny feet, and the film is rubbish, and that's even worse than usual because I got my hopes up.

There's quite a tedious set-up with Jane (Katherine Heigl) flitting between two weddings in the same evening and being noticed by Kevin (James Marsden). Then off to work we go, where we discover Jane is in love with her boss, the very bland George (Ed Burns).

However, things pick up. Jane is stalked by Kevin, her repulsive sister Tess (Malin Akerman) steals George and then Kevin turns up to write an article about them. There is a fun, funny relationship between Jane and Kevin - like childish friends. I can believe they are real and that this is a real acquaintanceship, not at all what I would expect from a standard rom com. We get lines like, Kevin: 'Don’t you have any needs?' Jane: 'No, I'm Jesus.'

But then along comes the big ruiny monster, who decrees that in order for Jane and Kevin to become close, they must get drunk, thus undermining their entire relationship and insulting anyone invested in it. Not satisfied with that, the ruiny monster goes too far, and actually has them sleep together, while drunk - just wait for the old Disney ending where the characters finally get together, and the ruiny monster sticks his head in to remind you, wait a minute, they screwed in a car earlier - that's as together as they can get, who cares whether they kiss at the end of the film? Then the ruiny monster goes on an insane rampage, almost as if the scriptwriter wrote a half decent rom com, and the studio went, 'what the hell is this? It doesn't have any one of the numerous cliches we must force into rom coms these days to make them all the same, heartless pap so that people give up on love and the human race becomes extinct. What say you, ruiny monster?' And the ruiny monster says, 'to punish you, writer of non-mediocre dialogue, you must have every single rom com cliche ever devised shoved into the film in the last act.'

So, Jane ruins Tess's wedding (hooray! This is a mild bit of good that seeps into the generally awful final act - the only other good bit being when George kisses Jane - ooh, refreshing) but then when the sisters finally face up to each other, the wrong sister has an epiphany. It's like that bit in Notting Hill, after Julia Roberts has treated Hugh Grant like dirt from an hour and a half, and he has the epiphany and apologises - what's he apologising for? He didn't do anything wrong. So here, Jane is the one who has some kind of 'realisation' even though Tess is in the wrong. Tess fails to learn any lesson.

Then off Jane trots, to tick the boxes of all other rom com cliches, including the racing to get to the lover in time scene, always put in, even when completely unnecessary and the ruiny monster laughs as I hold my head in my hands, crying, 'Why? Why did you do this, ruiny monster?'

27 Dresses is good to a point, and then rubbish. I don't know whether I am glad it was good for a while, because I enjoyed myself, or upset it was good for a while, because it made it all the more soul-draining when it went sour. Maybe one day the ruiny monster will move on to other genres and let the rom com free and we'll have more of 'What colour is this - vomit?' and less 'she’s about to find the perfect fit'. Well, I can dream.

Ah, yes the Heigl and Marsden scenes were likeable and it wasn't an awful movie, yet it seemed torn between being silly enjoyable fluff (not quite) and having some moral for us all to learn from: The Grass Isn't Always Greener, Be Careful What You Wi... (read more) Ah, yes the Heigl and Marsden scenes were likeable and it wasn't an awful movie, yet it seemed torn between being silly enjoyable fluff (not quite) and having some moral for us all to learn from: The Grass Isn't Always Greener, Be Careful What You Wish For, etc, it just skims over all of that to make any point whatsoever. Meh. Bonus points for Judy Greer as the quirky, funny best friend.

Unbielievably, unless of Wimbledon, today I decided that I was going to watch this movie on sky tv...I don't know why! What to say? It's the usual, identical, completely forgettable love comedy, which the only scope is to try to steal tears and sobs.... (read more) Unbielievably, unless of Wimbledon, today I decided that I was going to watch this movie on sky tv...I don't know why! What to say? It's the usual, identical, completely forgettable love comedy, which the only scope is to try to steal tears and sobs. A sort of different story, in a completely impossible to reinvent kind of movie. Next step, Cake, with the co-star of Katherin Heigl in Gray's Anatomy Heather Graham.

Almost same story-line as "In Her Shoes" but more girly and cute with the wedding theme. I actually enjoyed it.

27 Dresses is so flimsy it gives froth a bad name.

Katherine Heigl carries 27 Dresses when all else fails, which it does with great regularity.

Certainly Heigl fares better in less formulaic fare, such as Judd Apatow's irreverent Knocked Up, but she does raise the level of this chick flick from bland to mildly entertaining.

All the plot elements that we're encouraged to care about in 27 Dresses resolve in a dud, and the only thing that feels good about the feel-good finish is that it means the movie's over.

27 Dresses makes the point that modern American weddings are all pretty much alike. The same could be said about modern American romantic comedies.