One for the Money - Debbie Does... Not

One for the Money
Director: Julie Anne Robinson

We got this good cop bad cop thing going...except we’re hookers. –Lula

I was shooting a gun. How hot is that? I'm gonna nail Morelli. Not 'nail' Morelli! You know what I mean... –Stephanie Plum

How does a person eat like you eat and look like you look? –Joe Morelli

Janet Evanovich's spunky heroine, Stephanie Plum, is adrift after getting a divorce and losing her job. To make ends meet, she becomes a bounty hunter, with her first big case revolving around a high school boyfriend who may be falsely accused.

Let me start by saying, “I’ve read the book.” This one sentence should set you up for the kind of review you’re about to read. I could make an effort to avoid comparing this movie to the book on which it’s based, but I’m choosing not to. I took a linguistics class in college and was taught that part of what I bring to the table is the person I am, based solely on my past experiences. And in this case, one of my past experiences is reading this book. So I can no longer see through the eye of someone who hasn’t, and why should I try?

So let’s begin with the casting. The main character is Stephanie Plum, as portrayed by Katherine Heigl. I feel like this was a good choice: Katherine is tall and slender with a penchant for playing strong-willed but slightly aloof women, of which Ms. Plum most definitely is. The other main characters are Joe Morelli, played by Jason O’Mara, and Ricardo Carlos “Ranger” Manoso, played by Daniel Sunjata. More decent casting. My one complaint, however, is the casting of Stephanie’s Grandma Mazur. Debbie Reynolds is a fine actress – a great actress, some may go so far as to say – but she is no Grandma Mazur.

The character of Grandma Mazur is supposed to be colorful verging on insane – she should be a loose cannon edging ever closer to explosion or death, with the understanding, and almost expectation, that the events will be simultaneous, if- and whenever they happen. Debbie Reynolds has too much control, too much poise, dignity and class to play such a character, in my humble opinion.

Plot then, is the next point of contention. While I’ve yet to see a movie whose book I’ve read that follows the plot to the tee – nor do I expect to in the future – I judge the movies based on the liberties they take with the plot. The liberties taken by this particular movie were understandable. However, I do have issues with a few. I don’t like the way they handled Benito Ramirez’s proprietary and psychotic attitude toward Stephanie. The element of fear was removed from the emotional make-up of the movie… and the ending, therefore, was vastly different than it was in the book.

I don't blame the movie for failing to live up to my expectations. If anyone's to blame, in fact, it's Janet Evanovich, the author of the series, for her comedic and addictive writing.

Overall, did I like the movie? Yes. Did I love it? No. Will I add it to my personal collection? Only if it makes it to the $5 rack at Target.

Takeaways: some stories are better between book jackets than credit rolls. Never leave the house in Jersey without your tube of lip gloss, can hairspray and pocketful of sass... gun and taser optional.