That would have been a better name for the upcoming film, My Best Friend's Girl. My apologies for subjecting you to this, but you have to watch this trailer:
If you're an aspiring screenwriter who has some sort of romantic comedy under his/her belt (quality isn't an issue), throw it into the path of Kate Hudson. It will suddenly be a movie.
I was a fan of her in Almost Famous, but that's slowly becoming a description of her as a person. Whether or not she's that talented, she has a chance to be very famous if she stops making movies like this.
And Jason Biggs, while entertaining at times, has somehow managed to ride a wave of fame simply for having sex with a pie. All it got me was a stern talking to after home-ec class.
Finally, don't even get me started on Dane Cook. While I've laughed at some of his jokes, his material is suspect to put it mildly. The Onion summed up my problems with it better than I ever could.
The thing is, after having seen him in Employee of the Month, I think he could actually be quite good in the right kind of role. So yes, I just said that this film looks worse than Employee of the Month.
Ignoring any of the actors involved with the project, the story itself has a number of logic problems. I mean, aside from the fact that I'm expected to believe that a person would be named Tank.
Here's the deal. I enjoyed the movie Hitch. Most of that is due to the fact that Will Smith is so damn likable. But at the least, the premise of the movie was believable in a "this is believable in a romantic comedy film sort of way." I don't know if Hitch's profession actually exists, but why not?
In My Best Friend's Girl, we're given a similar occupation, except that the guy gets people to go back to their exes instead of getting them matched up with people they like but haven't approached. And he does it by actually DATING them, not creating some elaborate scenario.
I'm willing to go with this. What I cannot accept is that the guy's ROOMMATE is the other main character in the story. It would have been bad enough if it was just a friend, but his freaking roommate?
I mean, sure, if a guy actually existed that did this for a living, I guess he would have a roommate. But that adds a whole mess of logic problems into the pot. Hudson's character says they've been dating for 5 weeks. Are you telling me she hasn't met his roommate (or at least seen a picture) in FIVE WEEKS?!
And then she apparently starts dating Cook's character and must never go over to his place, otherwise she'd recognize it. (I mean, I assume she at least went to Biggs' apartment once during those five weeks.)
Even if I could accept everything so far...what exactly is Biggs' plan? If she takes him back and falls for him, then clearly she's going to meet his roommate at some point. Don't you think that will end badly? It's not a She's All That-type thing where he falls for someone he never intended to and she finds out the truth. This guy is setting himself up for disaster.
Plus, couldn't they think of a better title than My Best Friend's Girl? That doesn't incorporate the guy's occupation at all. If that's not the point of the movie, then why have that strange occupation in the first place? Everything in the second half of the movie could still have happened without it.
Minus one billion points for Hollywood. Nay, humanity.