Hey everyone, so I’m gonna be doing another book vs. movie post today! I’m gonna be comparing and contrasting the first book of the popular Stephanie Plum series One For the Money by Janet Evanovich with the movie adaptation. Let’s begin!
Stephanie Plum is unemployed and looking for a job. She finds a job offering through her cousin Vinnie, who turns out to be a bail bondsman. She wants to work there as an assistant, but the job is already taken by Connie. So she starts apprehending some clients who have skipped out on their bonds, starting with Joe Morelli, a cop and past one-time lover. Morelli is wanted for murder. Stephanie really needs the money so she blackmails Vinnie into working for him. While trying to find Morelli, Stephanie attracts the attention of a heavyweight boxer involved in the murders of several women.
I love this series so much (and am currently reading book 12, Twelve Sharp). The characters are lovable, fun, mysterious and sexy. One for the Money is a great start to the series. Stephanie Plum is witty, funny character. She loves to eat greasy pizza and has appetite for donuts and cupcakes. She also hates working out and she’s a horrible bail bondsman. But these are the things that make Stephanie so likable, she relatable and down-to-earth. Hey family is all sorts of fun and crazy with her neurotic mom, quiet dad, and gun-toting Grandma Mazur (she is hilarious!). The book is fast-paced and the story line is interesting. It’s a good balance of suspense, mystery, and comedy. Evanovich is an awesome writer. Shes good with details, setting, and character depth. One for the Money is a very enjoyable read.
And now onto the movie…
Same plot, same storyline. But a really awful movie adaptation of one of my favorite novels. I was really excited to hear that there was going to be a movie adaptation of one of my favorite book series. But once I heard that Katherine Heigl was playing the role of Stephanie Plum, I was bit upset. I had envisioned how Stephanie looked in my mind after reading several novels and Heigl just didn’t fit the role for me. Personally I would have liked to see Sandra Bullock play the role…
She’s funny, talented, and awesome! She’s already a natural brunette and I felt that she would’ve carried out Stephanie’s characteristics perfectly. But I also know Stephanie Plum was more around Heigl’s age. So that’s probably why she was picked by casting directors. So I calmed down and accepted the casting decisions. The other actors/actresses picked to fill the other main role weren’t that bad. And Sherri Shepard playing the sassy hooker, Lula, was actually pretty funny.
The movie was okay by itself I guess, but if you had already read the book, you were already biased and maybe thought it was a crap movie. The acting was okay, but most of the time overly cheesy. A lot of the one-liners fell flat for me and half of the time Heigl kept getting out of character. Throughout out the movie Heigl kept going in and out of Jersey accent and it kept annoying me. (keep in mind Stephanie is a Jersey girl).
The action scenes were done pretty well though. And the story line, fit pretty well into about 1 hour and 45 min, and explained well enough for the people who hadn’t read the books. The one thing Heigl did do right is capture Stephanie’s crazy antics well.
And the movie definitely casted the right hotties for the roles of Morelli and the sexy, mysterious Ranger (also captures perps except he’s 10 times better at it than Stephanie).
Overall the book is fantastic! But the movie is so crap and cheesy, that it really doesn’t do justice to the original novel. I actually really like Katherine Heigl as an actress, but this was not her best movie.
Final Verdict: Book is a 1000 times better the movie!
THIS BLOG claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to its respectful owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.