My major plot-related problem is the decision by Kevin's editor to publish his story (which was basically a string of unflattering comments about both the main character and her sister) after agreeing, at his request, to hold off publishing it for a week. It's not so much that she, y'know, lied to his face, it's more that she did it for absolutely no reason. When he calls her on it, she doesn't even try to give a worthwile reason other than "Hey, I gave you x number of inches in the paper, be happy." Obviously I know that this needed to happen to drive a wedge between the main characters so they can reconcile in the end, but from a non-meta perspective, it just bugged me.
You think that's a problem? How about the fact that the people it was about didn't know? Can you say "libel lawsuit"?
Maybe I just come from a more messed-up family, but the father's "you have to forgive each other just because you're sisters" argument seemed to ring a bit hollow. NO ONE can hold grudges better than family. I have relatives who haven't spoken in DECADES over much, much less than the stunt that Jane pulled at the engagement party.
This troper's parents say the same thing to her regarding her sister, who has pulled worse stunts than the sisters in this film. Some parents just ... firmly believe that their children should get along, even when unforgivable crap has been done.
Yes, of course. It's totally unreasonable for parents to ask their children to make up and get along. Maybe it's because This Troper was from a messed up extended family but a close immediate family while most of her friends suffered from dysfunctional households...but it's a lot easier going through life, having inconsistent friendships and terrible times that many acquaintances don't care to hear you bitch about when you have close family to rely on and support you.
It's also implied that we're supposed to side with Jane because Tess "stole" Jane's infatuation, although YMMV on that whole debate.
Add me to this list. It also seems to be a double-standard; people believe that brothers can dislike each other, but apparently sisters are supposed to be BFF otherwise they're being petty. (Although it seems I'm the only one who thought Jane's smackdown was pure win.)
I don't understand why everyone aims their What the Hell, Hero? are Jane over Tess. I mean, Tess was basically tricking George into marrying her just because he was "nice to her"...that really isn't love, that's just Tess using George to feel better about herself. Not to mention how she takes Jane for granted and has a chronic case of It's All About Me. Yet George is the only one who calls out Tess on lying to him. I feel like the whole speech was the wake-up call Tess needed, it's not like she would have listened to reason if Jane tried talking to her like an adult.
This story makes no sense. The assertion that a young woman could have been bride's maid 27 times in her relatively short life time strains plausibility in the first place. Even if we accept this premise as possible, then said women would have to have, at the very least, an extremely large circle of female friends to be a bridemaid at all those weddings. Yet, in the movie it appears as though the main character has virtually no friends outside of work and family. So, How on earth does she know all these people who she's a bridesmaid for?
It's heavily implied that while her circle of close friends is very small, she has a large circle of acquaintances, all of whom ask her to be a bridesmaid because she's so organized and dependable.
Not to mention that she probably volunteers to be bridesmaid every time one of her acquaintances announces an engagement, and by now she's got a long resume of her wedding planning experience.
Considering that she was a bridesmaid for two weddings on the <i>same night</i>, I can see how it could be possible. I was a bridesmaid/groomschick for 3 weddings for very close friends in just over 2 years, my husband was in two of those PLUS another, and our wedding happened in the same timespan. Also, many of the weddings she was in seemed to be extravaganzas with 8 or more bridesmaids, so that would expand the level of friendship/acquaintance that would ask her to be a bridesmaid.
It's just a literalization of the cliché "always a bridesmaid, never a bride."
The way everyone freaked out over the blonde sister paying Pablo to clean her house. Heck, when I was his age, I would have been THRILLED to have actually been paid for doing that stuff!
You would have been thrilled that the fiancee of your Big Brother was taking advantage of you as child labor and keeping him in the dark about it?
Most children would have needed to do basic household chores like hoovering, dishes and laundry anyway, not to mention help out during the wedding. Getting paid would have been a great bonus.
Also, Unfortunate Implication time: Pablo is Latino, and Tess (who assumed he didn't speak English earlier in the film) is sort of forcing him into the stereotype of Latino = janitor/cleaning lady.
This troper has never been able to reconcile why Jane, given her assertion in the first lines of the movie that she discovered at a young age that she loves weddings more than anything in the world, did not, at any time in her life, even consider either becoming a wedding planner, owning/managing a wedding venue (i.e. hotel, country club, etc.), or going into a related field. Instead, she is employed as a glorified secretary in what appears to be company dedicated to outdoor recreation. Perhaps she tried to go into the wedding business in the past and failed, but it's a very large inconsistency for the movie to never even mention off-hand (would have just taken one line to cover it)
She was fresh out of college and needed a job when she started working for George, and just kept the job because she loved him.