I was really looking forward to this film as i am a massive fan of micheal vartan.
He did not let me down nor did the film, i just found that it was unlikely that he would end up with Natasha Henstridge. Yes he would of ended up with her character but she want as beautiful or as striking as she as an actress chosen could have been. I think they should have changed actresses.
What do you think?
I thought she was WAY too fine for him. She's one of the most beautiful women on earth.
shareNuh-uh!! He's hot and could do much better than her!
Have u seen Alias? He's the hottest thing in it
this is one of the worst movie's i have ever seen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! pure crapola!
at least MV is hot.
This is an odd exchange, but in case you don't know this - there aren't any more beautiful than she.
shareI think its the hair. I have since seen her in Bounce and thought she was quite beautiful in that and she had shoulder length hair. Whereas in It had to be you she has short and looks too ordinary.
shareHey footloose - i'm in agreement with you. I'm a big fan of MV, romantic comedies and i've seen some of NH's other work and think she's great. BUT...i thought that his performance (compared to his standard) was a little wooden, she didn't evoke any great feelings of sympathy and the most exciting part for me was the end!! Their chemistry didn't flow and the conversations seemed forced, especially when people were mistaking them as a couple. Timing was off and i'm sorry but i like my comedy with LOL moments. Diane Lane has a great knack for those.
Sorry if i'm offending anyone on this...but like i'd said, i'm a fan, and that's pretty much the only thing that kept me watching.
this movie seriously sucked! i mean, there was absolutely no story what so ever, the dialogues were as fake as can be, the leading actrice and actor had no chemistry what so ever! the music was awful!
and was it just me or was there a mistake in the movie? it said "one year later" and she and charlie finally got together (woooow, didn't see that one coming...) but wasn't she supposed to get married to david in 9 months?! (sorry if this has been posted before..)
and I don't want to offend anyone, this is just my opinion on the movie..
No wonder this slipped under the radar.
There was a problem in casting. Natasha Hestridge is a beautiful woman, with supermodel good looks, but she's not meant for romantic comedies. Most leading ladies in romcoms (Meg Ryan, Diane Lane, Sandra Bollock, Annette Benning) are pretty in a wholesome, girl-next-door kind of way with great comedic timing. Natasha just didn't fit the bill. She lacked the pretty goofiness required to make her character endearing. And I agree with the clothes. I think they were really trying hard to mask Natasha's gorgeousness with the frumpy clothes. It looked so awkward and made Natasha look so much older than MV.
Michael Vartan was perfectly cast. He is very handsome, but has a low-key aura about him which doesn't make him too debonaire which is just right for the role.
But these two actors had zero chemistry.
Too bad. This movie would have been really cute. Very similar to "An Affair to Remember" without the tragedy.
think of this movie like it's a clock. natasha is what makes it tick.
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, "... I drank what?"