When I read the Plot Summary: "A young woman on the run allows grieving parents to believe she is their late son's wife." I immediately thought that they had taken the movie -"Mrs. Winterbourne" - and changed the title for TV. WRONG!!! The plot summaries could be used to describe both movies. It as at this point the resemblance ends. The movie is slow, predictable, and at times - down right boring. There are very strong actors in the movie, but apparently the director did not know how to utilize their talents. The blame should be shared equally by the screenwriter. The script is "sappy". Somehow I felt that I should connect with the lead character (played by Tracey Gold) but I could not decide whether she should be liked, disliked or even pitied. The character's motivation was revealed too late in the story to justify the ending. In "Mrs. Winterbourne" the last ten minutes were the best in the movie, the plot and subplots all came together based on good character development. In "She's No Angel" it felt like the writer and/or director (or possibly even the film editor) realized that the film was running long and they wrapped up the story line in the remaining allotted time. I believe that when watching a movie the viewer has a responsibility to suspend reality and that filmmakers are allowed to use poetic license. I think their license should be suspended for this one.
Review of She's No Angel
