The Devil Wears Flip-flops

[Aside: Remember the reports of John Kerry's becoming flustered when Bush supporters attended his stump speeches and clapped thongs together as emblems of his flip-floppiness?]

[Editor's Note: I just finished re-reading and pseudo-editing this piece a couple months after its initial writing, and even I am not sure what I was originally rambling about, so unless you *very* recently viewed The Devil Wears Prada and performed a neurotic personal/social/occupational/moral/philosophical/psychological analysis of all the deeper issues that aren't actually addressed in this movie, it probably won't make much sense to you, either. Trust, me, don't read it. I should actually delete it, but it's been sitting in the queue for so long just waiting to be unleashed on the poor, unsuspecting public that I couldn't bring myself to do that. In fact, this Editor's Note is the best thing about this piece, so you've already had the dessert first. Do yourself a favor, and skip the main course.]

So I just watched The Devil Wears Prada tonight with Danny. Though the movie was his pick—not mine—Danny found it very boring, whereas I (initially) liked it. I think I am really drawn to the genre of sermonizing chick-flicks (My Best Friend's Wedding, 13 Going on 30, View from the Top, et al). I think they're the kind of movie Eddie would criticize as predictable and formulaic, but because I so rarely see movies, I am not as familiar with all the formulas. This kind of movie is particularly appealing to me because its plot is often situated within questions about career, the unknown future, finding one's way in life, and/or fulfilling one's destiny.^*

However, I'm really conflicted about this one. On the one hand, I liked the easy-to-grasp morals, things like "don't make your job your life" and "friends and family should come before work" and "love is more important than success or money." (Admittedly, these lessons are fairly trite, as Eddie would be the first to point out.) Still, I'm conflicted, because I feel that being dedicated to ones job is commendable, and the film seems to neglect this point. Anne Hathaway (Andy Sachs) is peerless at her workplace; she masters what turns out to be an immensely challenging position, and should be applauded for doing her work excellently. She starts out certainly lacking the requisite skills and knowledge base, and quickly surmounts these handicaps to be a top-rate personal asst.

Moreover, it's hard to fault Andrea as having given up her identity, because she shows great remorse about taking the Paris Fashion Week trip away from Emily. (Even though in the end she does it at Miranda's behest). Although Emily still treats Andrea with condescension, Andrea tries to treat her with love and kindness. (And clearly, in a half-body cast, Emily is in no condition to attend Fashion Week anyway). Andrea is fiercely loyal to Miranda despite the latter's harsh and repulsive treatment of the former; she feels compassion for Miranda during her divorce, and tries to console her. In short, I didn't really buy the line that Andrea was degenerating into an immoral, obsessive solipsist

I felt very conflicted about Andrea's leaving her position, because had she stayed on for a full year as planned, (or even two years), she would have done quite well, and would have been able to snag any position in the publishing industry. Miranda was not only a source of connections and networking (and a bottomless fountain of hand-me-down swag), but actually a good mentor: she is at the top of her field, filled with business acumen, and unparalleled in terms of meticulous attn to detail. Remaining at Runway would have been incredibly remunerative (in all senses of the word) for Andrea, without necessarily turning her into some sort of Martha Stewart-esque monster.

I am most conflicted about Andrea's future. One can see alot of Miranda in Andrea, and I felt that the ending was left very open-ended in terms of what will happen in Andrea's future. It seems that with her experience at Runway, her commitment to excellence, and similarities to Miranda, she would likely rise to the top of her field—and very probably become the same sort of "it's lonely at the top" figure as her mentor. This is especially true considering the fact that Andrea sleeps with someone else when she was "on a break" with her boyfriend, Nate, played by Entourage's Adrian Grenier. (Didn't she learn anything from the Ross-Rachael polemic on Friends?!?) This points to relationship problems down the line (and Miranda has her second divorce during the course of the film).

After turning off the DVD, my usual post-banal-girly-movie glow faded very quickly as I gave further contemplation to the thoughts outlined above. The denouement of Devil doesn't tie things up neatly enough for a film of its genre, yet it isn't edgy or original enough to fully break from the conventions and clichés of that field, either. I've flip-flopped several times deciding whether I like this film. All this ambivalence is too tiring, so I won't be viewing this movie again. But maybe I'll need to watch it again, just to be sure of that.


*Although I enjoy this cinematic genre, the mixed messages that these movies are sending me are more than a little confusing. I am finding it extraordinarily difficult to make major life decisions based on the information and pearls of wisdom I've gleaned from them. For example, in View from the Top, Gwyneth Paltrow (Donna) succeeds in her quest to become a New York-Paris first class flight attendant, and thus finds the satisfaction and meaning in life that she had been missing. Contrast that with the outcome for Jennifer Garner (Jenna) in 13 Going on 30, in which Garner's wish (making a temporal leap from 13 to 30) is granted, but is greatly disappointed that her dream does not meet her expectations. Mix in Julia Roberts (Julianne) of My Best Friend's Wedding, whose fails to achieve her goal of marrying her best friend, but finds a happy ending nonetheless. What is the take home message that Hollywood is trying to convey?