We in the United States like to believe that we reside in a country without royalty and nobility. The only people who think that there is true egalitarianism have never worked in the Entertainment and Media Industries. There is an aristocratic elite, no question, and it is not exactly made up of politicians (although there are some). It is largely composed of those who control media, particularly in television, film, radio, music, fashion, and print. They control what get's seen and what doesn't. When these people put on huge events that involve the press, cameras, and limousines, the public comes out to pay unquestioned homage to these elites, often on the sideline behind a barricade. With cameras flashing, these people are treated like the royalty of the 17th and 18th centuries. "The Devil Wears Prada" examines what is like to be in the inner circle of one of these elites.

In addition to the public's clamoring to glimpse these powerful elites, another segment of the population desires to become one of these people by trying to "break into" the media business. Since there are many more people who dream of being in these circles than there are spots available, this gives enormous power to those already on the inside, particularly those who have sway to either make or break an up-and-coming career. "The Devil Wears Prada" chronicles an aspiring journalist who lands a dream job that, she is told, "thousands would kill for": being the personal assistant to the editor of one of the largest fashion magazines, Runway, whose editor-in-chief makes Bill Gates seem like a softy. The character, Miranda Priestly (played by Meryl Streep in a tour-de-force Oscar-nominated performance) is in fact modeled after real-life Vogue Magazine editor Anna Wintour whose chilling detachment from those around her, her ability to make or break fashion careers, and her cut-throat demands on her staff have become legendary throughout the fashion world.

In the film, the corporation that is "Runway" is no democracy. It is feudalism, with Mirander the absolute queen ruling over her dominion of serfs who constantly scatter about trying to please her. The central character, Andy Sachs, is plunged into this Madison Avenue purgatory without knowing the rules of the game. A journalism-major from Northwestern, Andy knows next to nothing about the fashion world, but it's not just the fashion world--it's the world of the elite in New York. Since everyone wants to gain favor from the higher-ups in order to step up the ladder, there's often over-the-top deference to those in elite positions. I half-expected her female assistants to curtsy when Mirander entered the office. Mirander knows perfectly-well her status and she uses it, often flaunts it, to her advantage. Her staff run around like castle servants anticipating the arrival of the Lady of the Manor.

Streep is magnificent as her voice never reaches past mezzo-piano. When one of her staff has transgressed, or simply cannot fulfill her expectation (I doubt Superman could hold a job there), in the softest tone possible she expresses her disappointment. And yet, the anticipation of her negative reaction is what makes for moments of anti-gravitational intensity. Of course, she never compliments anyone when they've done well. Excellent performance is taken for granted in this kingdom. I've never found the raging tyrant frightening. Rather, it is the even-tempered soft-spoken empress with absolute power who sends anyone who to displeases her to the block with a disinterested wave of the figure that is the most terrifying.

At one point in the film, Andy chuckles when Miranda fusses over some seemingly identical-looking belts which of course spawns a lecture about how Andy's current wardrobe was in fact created by the fashion elite. This does point to another side of the fashion facade which I think may be the point of the film. If you take away the cameras, the celebrities, the allure, the models posing in museums wearing the latest by Christian Dior, at the end of the day all this is about is just jackets, belts, purses, skirts, dresses, and pants. I think one of the characters says as much. These clothes may look wonderful, even stunning, but that's all they are. They are lifeless pieces of fabric cut in a certain way to make the wearer look appealing but that's all it is. The fashion industry of course needs to perpetuate the idea that clothing is much more than clothing: that beautiful fashions will create fairy-tale existences for the purchasers. They are meant to represent a life of luxury and splendor and the purchase of these articles will bring you closer to that reality. When it doesn't, you need to buy more of these clothes. And you need to read Runway (aka Vogue) to tell you what you should buy. Of course, the only ones who actually have these fairy tale existences are the ones providing the clothes. Most of the people buying these fashions are still behind the barricade. Is there an irony here?

Really enjoyed the movie because it shows a women that change her style for better, is earning good money, is becoming famous and so. What's the problem? Her friends are jealous and don't support her. Her boyfriend is selfish and he can move to another to city to get a better job but she can't travel to Paris... for God sake.

Miranda is great, showing everybody that life is not a fairy tail, no matter where you are or what job you have. Shows that we really need to make sacrifices to get where we want.

Everything was perfect, but the end. I really thought Andy would grow up and face the world as it is, but unfortunately she decided to take the easy path. Sad.

The movie is based on a novel (2003) written by Lauren Weisberger which has been translated to more than 35 languages.

The Director David Frankel had read the novel and later thought of making it into a movie. There were several screenplay writers who worked to finalize the movie script, but the credit was ultimately given to Aline Brosch McKenna.

The movie is based on a real life true character the editor of Vogue Anna Wintour where Lauren had worked as an assistant for a short while. In the movie the role of real Anna is named Miranda (played villainously by Meryl Streep) and that of Lauren is named Andy (played by a new comer Anne Hathway).

The choice of Meryl was obvious but Anne had to push herself to get the role, but the new debut of Miranda's first secretary Emily played by Emily Blunt was after auditioning 1000 aspirants.

Meryl based her role and enacted it just imitating a brutal MAN running his company.

The story is about how Andy who wants to be a journalist gets sucked into the fashion industry through this magazine where she gets job as a secretary to Miranda, who is a brutal task master - one who is obnoxious and never satisfied.

The first secretary Emily aspires to be with Miranda, but with time Andy rises the ladder in the organization and does not realize that she is losing her love, her friends and her soul in the work she is doing.

When she realizes it she quits the job and joins a firm as a journalist and there the movie ends showing Andy liberated and happy.

The movie takes a shot at Fashion industry and takes a dubious view-point and presents it with enough guts to expose the underbelly of it.

So this time on my second viewing - I felt that - you take any industry - and when you work in it and climb the ladder - and if you are sucked into it defending it and living it - you will not be aware of the dirty underbelly of that industry.

But if one has to protect one's soul - one has to protect even if one works as a journalist - or even as a social worker or any other thing.

The moment your soul takes precedence - you will feel that the work you are doing does not fulfill your search and what you are seeking.

So to show the Fashion industry in bad light is a one-dimensional take. As much as fashion designers are superficial - so are journalist - so are any other professions.

So this was the take of mine - while watching the movie a second time.

The movie was a dud on USA box office but raked mullah on international release and became the biggest block-bluster internationally.

What happened actually was that people went gaga over the designer clothes worn in the movie rather than taking the message home.

I think, in my first viewing there was so much of critical buzz, that one gets dragged in the flow of positive reviews. Now after 10 years, it is a right frame of mind from which one watches the movie and gives a balanced review.

Overall - it was a okay movie. I will go with 5.5 out of 10.