It was a great character enacted by Reese Witherspoon. She was outright outstanding. However, the film didn't appeal to me. Mainly, because almost every character seemed to have a voice-over. I remember at least four of them.

So just the mere presence of VO makes something unappealing?

Really?

That's a shame. Cuz there's some really good stuff out there with VO. McKee has ruined a lot of movies for you.

As far as I'm concerned Election is the touchstone for VO.

I'm glad someone brought up the V.O. thing. Yes, there is a disposition in Hwood against narrator voiceover, probably due to so many bad scripts where the writers use it poorly.

But there is nothing inherently wrong with narrator voiceover. Some of the best movies ever have used it to great effect with Election a prime example.

The rule of thumb I tell writers in deciding to use / not use narrator V.O. is ask this question: "Does it enhance the story?" If yes, go for it. If not, don't use it.

Of course there are some stories like Forrest Gump or Shawshank where you simply HAVE to use V.O. to stitch together all those time jumps.

But again, I do not believe there is anything wrong with V.O. per se, only on how it's used by writers.

Look at Fight Club; great use of VO - in fact, I think it would have been a much weaker film without it.