|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- "Their conflicts are largely due to Gary's immaturity and inflexibility." This seems to be a little bit off from the movie. The movie implied relationship problems on both sides. For example, in the movie Gary would rather sit and watch TV instead of going to get his wife more lemons. But why does she need more lemons? Her answer is merely "because I need more". They weren't for the meal, she just needed more lemons. It implies somewhat immaturity on Gary's side, but on Brook's side it implies unrealistic perfection that doesn't have to be attained. I think either the line should be taken out, or it should be rewritten to include both sides. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 19:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Added a little more about Brooke's personality. The last edits seemed to elaborate on Gary's faults but not Brooke's, which misrepresents the point of the movie and added the apparent bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
What was the original ending??
At www.imdb.com trivia page, it's stated they filmed an ending where they stay together, and an ending where they break up, and neither ending pleased the test audience.126.96.36.199 16:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Bennett Turk
I removed the PAINFULLY long list of international grosses by country. They were totally unnecessary, and probably cribbed off of Boxofficemojo. I'll leave those graphs of box office position for now, though they also don't belong.
^^what's wrong with the box-office positions. What harm can it do!. Sorry about the others though.
"The romance/comedy film has proven to be very successful grossing $28 world-wide." ...$28? Wow, how impressive! ;-)
Besides the typo - mentioning only the grossing figures (without the budget) is completely useless anyway. You can only tell if it's a success by mentioning budget AND gross.
Is it really a comedy? I found the movie pretty sad, not particularly funny, and the ending is pretty bad. Looks like a drama to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charea (talk • contribs) 20:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to say, this plot summary is great. More movies' plot summaries should look like this. Far too many are bullet-by-bullet run downs which are unreadable-SF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 06:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
About the DVD's Viewing Options.
I have the DVD of the movie, and at the beginning, it gave me the option to either see it from the guy's point of view, or the gal's point of view. I went with hers. I have not yet seen it from his point of view. Shoot, I haven't even checked to see yet if the offer was just a one time only gimmick that only occurs the first time you load it up on a player. What I want to know it, does it make an actual difference whose side you choose? For example, her nudity. Either Oprah W. or Barbara W. made a big deal about her nude scene when they showed the clip on their respective shows, and the clips seemed to imply her bare butt was there under the pixelation. When I saw the DVD version after missing it in theaters, her bare butt was indeed there. Meanwhile, I've done image searches that imply she bared her breasts too. If so, I'd imagine it was during his point of view. Granted, the breasts seen in those images during such searchs, do not match the breasts shown in the notorious papparazzi shots of her at a beach. So I'm guess they are faked, even if the scene is in the movie. I'm sorry if that example seems to focus too much on female nudity, but without it, I'm left wondering why there would be a version from his point of view. When I watched it from her point of view, or do I mean, "her side of the story"?, I watched it again with the commentary and subtitles on. Nothing was mentioned about extras for the optional viewing of it from his side of the story. So, was the option in the end, just about choosing sides, even if somewhat prejudgemental? Just curious. Leo Star Dragon 1. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 04:16, 31 March 2011 (UTC)