Jak stracić chłopaka w 10 dni

It’s a shame that this comedy is so needlessly long. Thanks to the pleasant last quarter of an hour, I would be more forgiving toward it. Kate Hudson are Matthew McConaughey are very good in it. (05.05.2003)

I've heard that this romantic comedy is good. While watching it, I often wondered what makes it so good after all. It's not a bad movie that should be condemned right away, but there are moments that are simply cheap and cater to the genre and target audience. The main role is played by a buffed actor who has a pastry tray instead of a belly, which he naturally showcases frequently. Next to him, there is a fairly attractive actress who doesn't really know how to act that much, but looks good on screen and also happens to have a famous mother. Kate doesn't appear naked in this one, but she doesn't need to, she just needs to have a certain expression. In this case, however, you believe her character more than anywhere else. The plot of the film is not brilliant at all. He wants to win a bet and keep a woman for 10 days for his work and a dance, she has to write an article about how to lose a guy in 10 days. In short, she wants to agitate him properly, he clings on with all his might, after eight days they realize they love each other, on the tenth day, they discover the truth about the beginning of their relationship, they get really angry at each other, and in the end, they can hug each other. When you summarize the story in one sentence - ok, it's a compound-complex sentence - and don't leave out anything significant, it's a bit strange, but there's nothing to be done. It's a relatively simple comedy for a pleasant evening. I didn't expect anything more, and I didn't get anything more. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/06/nebezpecne-znamosti-jak-ztratit-kluka.html (21.02.2013)

Kate on the doorstep of her entry into the rom-com genre and Matthew in a period when he couldn't choose movies. In other words, a prime example of how several well-shot romantic scenes can be drowned in a flood of screaming attempts at humor. As a whole, it is unacceptable, bizarre, and logically flawed, and desperately full of plot holes. However, in individual aspects, it is at least a little decent. 50% (04.09.2006)