The Single's Guidebook

Romantic-comedies are very popular and production companies are churning them out, but there is a huge variation in quality. This whole production seems like it's low budget, from the script to the cast to the locations and director, it all seems rushed. I'm really surprised that Paramount+ put their name on such a bad production.

A good film always starts with a good script and this film doesn't have it. The characters Molly and Jackson don't have chemistry, they're stiff. Molly's office has echoes, too much empty space.

If Reel One isn't concerned with quality, I don't have to watch their productions.

We didn't get far into this to realize it was a waste of time. The lead actress was not funny even though she tried really hard to be cute. Her counterpart seemed like he might be able to carry the film at first but then the cooking class scenario erased any chance of that happening. The whole thing came off like a cheap sitcom with poor setups and flat punchlines. The only thing missing was a laugh track. The actors lacked chemistry and intrigue to the point where you are just waiting for the scene to end. I mean how does one character realize something is burning and the other one is just as close and doesn't?

One or more leads being a social media influencer has become popular in these movies. In this movie, the script had strong similarities to ones where a reporter is sent to do a hit piece and becomes involved with the subject. That usually involves a tough and relentless editor or in this case Molly's boss. In this type of story, that almost always leads to the development of the conflict in the romance. And the resolution is almost always the same.

Despite Molly's rough start refusing help with the bookcase, Molly turns out to be decent enough. She has an upbeat personality with Jackson, but seems a little discouraged at other times.

Jackson thinks he is confident and attractive. He easily attracts first interest with women, but his confidence is really arrogance and he has trouble getting past the first conversation. That's where Molly comes in. I grew tired of the word "wingwoman" but she really helps him.

It is common, almost a prerequisite, that the leads deny their attraction to each other as long as possible. In Jackson's case, I didn't think the movie did a good job of showing him realize it or why.

I enjoyed the banter between Molly and Jackson. The inevitable conflict gets a little more complicated than usual.

A big flaw in this genre is a lead who expects the world and corporations to revolve around making good relationships. Money bad! That almost seems to be Molly's mantra. Interesting attitude for an influencer since so many of them can make obscene amounts of money for seemingly little effort.

The acting is mixed from fair to poor. The actor playing Molly's boss is poor and her character is one dimensional. The same is true of Alessandra Santos' Cara. Philip Boyd's performance as Jackson is mixed. Meggan Kaiser as Molly is probably the most consistent.

I was surprised to find myself a little past halfway in the movie and still interested despite the complaints above. But from the climax through the end I was a combination of annoyed and disinterested at least partly because of the predictability.

This is really weird Reel One Entertainment TV movie and I talk about technical side. I didn't notice any bad cuts, and stock footage was almost non existing which are huge improvements from their other movies. It was filmed in Georgia which is another improvement as it's really boring to watch Canadian cities pretending to be an American one.

But it's wouldn't be ROE TV movie without loud and improper background music which destroys so many scenes. And as a bonus, evening/night scenes have really poor audio recording.

Both leads were good. Meggan Kaiser has a nice smile with a distinct and cute vampire teeth. She also has pretty curly hair, and that was a big issue in the movie - who changes its hairstyle every day? It ruined immersion, and some of these hairstyles just looked horrendous. At least in the Act III she had always her trademark hairstyle. Furthermore, she also changed wardrobe every day in Act I and II like a hairstyle, so it was obviously forced by director. Another immersion killer.

Both directors should be shamed for the start of a movie (some 45 sec) as this is 2022. Conveniently, they cut that part from a trailer. And don't watch trailer if you plan to watch movie as it literally shows everything.