Nancy Drew (2002)

So much average

Absolutely the worst movie.

Absolutely Fantastic

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

I love Maggie Lawson on "Psych," and I love Nancy Drew, so I was interested to see this 2002 "Nancy Drew." My experiences with Nancy in the past include the books, of course, Bonita Granville in the films, and the Pamela Sue Martin TV series, which I don't remember at all.In this incarnation, Nancy is in college with Bess and George. As a journalism major working on the school paper, she becomes interested in a football player who becomes comatose from taking ephedrine, and it's suspected that his girlfriend, a medical student, gave him the drug. Nancy sets out to find the truth.Lawson is pretty, flirtatious, confident, and spunky. Is she Nancy from the books? No, and I wonder if today it's possible to even capture her. The times are different, for one thing. Unlike some other book characters, Nancy Drew was never considered a good character for the movies, which is why the character created by Bonita Granville was so different. The book Nancy was pretty, serious-minded, intelligent, courageous, wore "frocks" and went to "luncheon" with Bess and George. Granville was hyperkinetic and constantly dragging Ted (not Ned, the studio changed his name) into dangerous situations. She was always in trouble. There was no Bess and George.Reading over the reviews on this site, it's interesting that some people have no familiarity with the films or the TV show. There was a complaint that Nancy is not a strawberry blonde here. At least she's blonde - she's been brunette in other incarnations. Someone else wrote that she must have had a million dollar bank account for a car like that. Nancy was always well-to-do - she never worked and she always had her own car. Someone else mentioned Nancy driving like a maniac. That undoubtedly comes from the Bonita Granville movies, which depicted Nancy as a reckless driver.The Nancy character from this "Nancy Drew" is updated more from the films than the books, but it keeps all of the book characters, and they all use their book names.Bottom line - if Nancy wasn't well-adapted from the 1930s books to 1930s films, there's no chance she's going to be well-adapted from the 1930s books to 21st century films or TV movies. As a regular story that has little relation to Nancy Drew, it's pleasant enough. Scarlett O'Hara, Mrs. Dewinter in Rebecca, Madame Bovary, Anna Karenina, etc. - none of these ever had to be updated; they were done in the period in which they were written. When a 2002 script doesn't even adapt an actual Nancy Drew story from one of the books, the task of creating a modern Nancy becomes impossible.

I am a die-hard Nancy Drew fan. I haven't yet spoken with someone who has sat through this entire movie and said "I really liked it. I really, really liked it." Maggie Lawson is a good actress, I'll give her that - in fact, a lot of the people on the movie are decent - if not great - actors. But no amount of talent could fix the scripting issues here.Seriously, I have never watched a movie like this - it's completely unique! It's hides its plot so well taht it took me 5 times watching it (a JOYFUL amount of time which I shall never get back) to actually understand what happened, who do it, and what they did. I'm not joking. It takes a really long time to comprehend what's going on.And now for the characters - look, I don't mind it if you want to make Nancy Drew you're own, but this was ridiculous. Nancy's father seemed to be the biggest problem for me. His character was no where near the supportive, caring single-father of the books. He was really mean, and insensitive to Nancy.Now, if you're a "die-hard" fan like me, you'll also notice how inaccurate the film is. (Non-diehards might want to ignore this paragraph.) Mostly it's little things. The name of the University is wrong. Nancy's dog was not named Butch, and was not a large breed. Things like that which Disney really could've stood to fix. But there's also problems with things like characters.Although, in the movie's favor, they did pick a really good-looking Ned (even if he has a total of 10 seconds screen time - accurate, if you've read the "On Campus" series).However, if you really love Nancy Drew, there's no stopping you from watching this I've learned. I say, go ahead, it's worth seeing once (heck, it's not like any of the other Nancy Drew films have been any better), if only to laugh at.

Maggie Lawson has all the necessary All-American Girl looks to play the feisty teen-aged sleuth and she's okay in a fast-talking way to be convincing as an investigative detective. But unfortunately, the plot gets bogged down in a lot of petty sorority doings without a hint of mystery showing up until later on--and by that time you don't care.The Nancy Drew of old is not here--instead we have a brassy, overbearing heroine with a rich girl background and her equally obnoxious teen-age girlfriends all given the latest slang expressions and one-liners in a script that's determined to update the famous series if not improve it. None of the happenings have the sort of mysterious quality called for in the Carolyn Keene mysteries.Another bad case of "updating" in an attempt to modernize the old-fashioned charm of the original. It rings false from beginning to end.

As the movie opens, an impossibly confident Nancy Drew is weaving her way through traffic while talking on her cell phone. As she starts college, she moves into an apartment-style dorm room with two perky friends and a third roomie with a strong Spanish accent who otherwise looks as if she belongs with the group. The girls try to get into Tri Pi sorority, full of adorable perky girls. At this point it seems this movie is going to be just so much fluff. Not so; one of the Tri Pi girls has to go with her football player boyfriend to the hospital, and the rumor is that the girl, a pre-med student, supplied the boyfriend with performance-enhancing drugs. Nancy tries to solve the mystery but encounters many roadblocks and ends up going too far, discovering that her actions have consequences, including her arrest. Her objective is to satisfy a journalism professor so evil he makes Professor Kingsfield look like a teddy bear. Can she do it? This is a Disney movie, isn't it? The formula is to overcome obstacles and reach a goal, though it may not be the exact goal you expect. Or maybe they went against the formula this time. You'll just have to watch.