One for the Money sells out, doesn’t cash in: Katherine Heigl doesn't pull off role

I've been a fan of Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum series for about a year and a half. In that time, I've come to realize that Evanovich's books are great for entertainment, with funny plots, many outrageous characters and romantic storylines.

But the mass marketing of the Plum series has led to a suffering product. Because of this excessive commercialization, the series' first book to film adaptation, One for the Money, was a weak attempt to recreate the story.

After Stephanie is fired from her lingerie-selling gig, she is thrown into the world of crime when she becomes a bounty hunter for her cousin's bond company. Her first assignment is to bring in her high school crush, policeman hunk Joe Morelli, who is charged with shooting and killing an unarmed man.

This task poses some issues for Stephanie, who juggles her feelings for Morelli and the possibility of earning a part of his sizable bond agreement. Although she keeps saying she is going after Morelli "for the money," Stephanie's feelings get in the way, and she ends up trying to prove Morelli's innocence.

The storyline from the book was belittled with visuals in the film. Katherine Heigl is nothing like the butt-kicking, bounty hunter Plum that Evanovich describes in her books. Instead, Heigl plays a rather meager, boring and nondescript Plum who doesn't make much of an impact on screen.

Debbie Reynold's impersonation of crazy Grandma Mazur seems forced and a bit lackadaisical. Daniel Sunjata's Ranger was a bit too chatty for the dark and mysterious character he is supposed to be portraying. The entire cast did not seem confident in their roles, leaving something behind that, if there, may have saved a bit of face for this film.

There were also, for a fan, too many differenes between the book and the film: most importantly, the ending. The movie took creative liberty to change the events of the ending, which Evanovich would likely not approve of. Hardcore Evanovich fans certainly do not.

In the movie's ending, the events seemed too rushed. The book did a much better job at gradually climbing to the story's climax. Adapting the book that much when making a movie is a definite no-no, especially for one as beloved as one in the Stephanie Plum series.

After the fairly recent release of the 18th Plum series novel and the release of the film Jan. 27, I think Evanovich should take a serious look at the fictional world she created. I can't help but think that she is selling out. Her style of writing is quickly deteriorating, and her storylines are getting drawn-out. Yes, for a while, Plum's story was entertaining. But now, it has morphed into a bunch of words on a page with no emotion and a subpar storyline. This lack of enthusiasm showed in the film as well, so I think it's time to put an end to the series.

The 100 teenagers who chattered throughout my experience of the film didn't help my imression of it, but the plot was that bad on its own. I read the book first, so I'm partial to the novel, and the vision I had of what each charactershould look like was nothing like they were in the movie.

They say a picture is worth a 1,000 word, and a film is usually worth much more. But, for One for the Money, I only need two: "let down."