j-38286
First i think that the movie is really funny and is a good movie to watch at the summer . Selena gomez nailed her role and i read that she had to learn how ride a horse or something like that . anyway the production was very good well job for the team behind this movie but i still think this is a great movie and i want to watch it again and again and again .
Dan
I'm usually not the person who enjoys these kind of movies, but this in particular I found to be very enjoyable. Yes the mistaken identity plot of the story is not new, however what matters is how it was approached.Shot beautifully on location it feels the atmosphere with European essence. There are no continuous crude and in-your face gags (which is the primary reason I guess many disliked the movie), no trite situations offensive to your intelligence. The movie does not have a frantic pace instead offering a hopelessly romantic and delectable experience with high level acting of all main three heroines and the side characters. Being a "teen oriented" comedy there were some situations that were a bit overly sugar-coated but even then you won't get diabetes from it. In fact I would say this movie is everything that Midnight Paris or To Rome with Love were not.
edwagreen
This is basically a romantic comedy of 3 American girls on summer holiday in France finding romance and revealing to themselves who they really are.Missing that tour bus leads to a madcap adventure when one of the girls is mistaken for resembling a British heiress, the latter being quite nasty to say the least.Romance abounds for the three women as they are wined and dined at Monte Carlo where the nasty one was supposed to be.There are some inane moments, but the picture is basically a satisfying one as the girls find adventure by being at the right place at the right time.As for our nasty heiress, she does receive an awakening of what life should be about and that in itself makes this a film worthy of praise.
Argemaluco
I suppose that many people will excuse the extremely low level of quality from Monte Carlo saying stuff such as "What did you expect? It's just a light comedy made for girls". I have two answers to that point of view: 1) There are some movies "for girls", such as St. Trinian's and Mean Girls, which were funny, interesting and very entertaining, because they had solid screenplays, competent performances and good direction. And number 2) That kind of excuse is only useful to insult the target audience of the film, because it tacitly suggests a level of ignorance in the girls which will avoid them to recognize the low quality of a film made for them. So, in summary: crap is crap regardless of the target audience it was made for.The screenplay from Monte Carlo is absolutely hollow and improbable, something which exacerbates the fact that it is totally unfunny and lacking of any ingenuity. Unfortunately, co-screenwriters Thomas Bezucha (who was also the director), April Blair and Maria Maggenti took the easy route, building the story on the cheap structure of a TV sitcom, free of any creativity, surprises and narrative integrity.As for the performances, Leighton Meester and Katie Cassidy tried to do their best, but their poorly written characters did not bring them too much to do. Selena Gómez feels listless and not credible at all, at the same time she shows an absolute lack of charisma. In conclusion, I cannot recommend Monte Carlo because it is a horrible film which bored me to tears.
AD
