thisanant I try to watch Katherine Heigl's movies so that was my first reason and I love comedies . this is pretty funny movie , fully focused on Heigl , simple story , some mystery and nice looking settings .

Maria Trim I don't know i must be easily pleased or its my age 66, but the reviews are a bit off for this film, I must watch a different movie. I really enjoyed it, paid £2.49 through Amazon to watch it, and spent a great couple of hours just chilling out, and having fun watching it. Its a crime romp with Katherine Heigl and the yummy Jason O'Mara so there is eye candy for both male and female. The plot is explained so i wont go there, just all I can say is if you want something to watch, and you like comedy, romance and a bit of crime romp then you cant go wrong with this. Its fun I am not sure I would have paid to see in cinema but to watch it for the price I did, lets face it, what can you get really for 2.49 nowadays so its worth the money. Go on you know you want too.

inspectors71 Maybe it's because I find Katherine Heigl a woman so radiantly lovely I can't get overly concerned about her reputation for being a Satanic wart-hog diva. I can't understand why the hostility toward One for the Money, wherein Heigl is newbie skip tracer Stephanie Plum.I can't comprehend why a movie that has some decent soul, a good amount of humor, and captures the essence of Janet Evanovich's heroine and cast of characters is so reviled.I can tell you that I've read a few of Evanovich's Plum books, and I didn't have trouble blending what I saw in my mind's eye with the film-maker's vision. Since I am, at heart, a pig, I also can imagine Heigl cuffed to her shower curtain rod and it's an R-rated movie.Sudsy!

Rena Smith I like this movie. Admittedly, there are no great surprises and if you've read the books you'll pretty much know what happens, but otherwise, people would be outraged that creative license was taken.I won't got into the details of the plot. Some Reviewer's wrote that's it's impossible to like this movie if you're a fan of the books. And while I accept that this is their view, I can't say that I agree. The plot in the movie generally follows the book, with a few deviations, but None of them dramatic. Some Reviewer's have complained that Big Blue was 70s and not 50s and while this is true, I can't say that it really mattered to me. It was a total boat, that's the main thing.For the most part, the casting is good. I was skeptical about the main cast, especially when I saw stills of the movie. I thought Heigl was too pretty to be Stephanie and the lead men on the other hand were not handsome enough. But that turned out to be unfounded, once I was watching the movie, they seemed perfect. Some have complained that Ranger smiles too much, but when you read the book and have time to develop the character, that's fine. If you just have a few Scenes in a movie, that would seem creepy. So I think they made a good choice. Anyway. It's not like he's running around with a constant girn on his face. He's suitably subdued and I think Daniel Sunjata did a very good Job of portraying Ranger. Lula and Connie are great, Vinnie is excellent, the only let-down was Grandma Mazur. I had imagined her to be tiny and wiry and she wasn't. She sat wrong with me, but maybe that's just my impression. And even that didn't matter too much to me.Bottom line, I don't understand why this movie gets so much stick. It's fine. I was going to rate it seven, but am going to rate it eight because the 5-something rating seems ridiculously low to me. Make up your own mind. But take it from a fan of the books: It is NOT impossible to like this movie.