Sure you can! You can make it in one week, if you are willing to skip some blows and whistles. You actually need just Mr. and Mrs Right, nice place to celebrate, wedding rings (which may be already in the family or borrowed or whatever) and bunch of friends to enjoy with. Yes, you still need and officiant, so your planning should start with him or her. Make sure all the paperwork is properly done, because wedding is not only about partying, it has legal consequences.
Use the power of social media, be prepared to have plenty of phone calls and delegate tasks if possible, try to focus on the ceremony and reception only. It doesn't matter if your wedding dress is not new (according to old saying you need only something new).
Top tip: keep your guest list small.
Your next question would probably be: Can I have a wedding in less than 48 hours?
Yes, this is possible, but not in all the states. Some have a law about waiting period, which varies from zero to six days. And in Florida, for instance, you need to complete a marriage preparation course before you can legally marry.
Here is a more in-depth article on that subject:
http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-license-requirements.html
On the other hand in Las Vegas you just have to come in person and have some kind of identity card.
But before you marry on such short notice, please think a bit. Are you really really sure you want to do it?
If the answer is yes, go for it and all the best!
How much time did you spend on your wedding?
Sorry, I don't remeber such scene. May be a variation, maybe not.
The computer crashed before I concluded my comment concerning early-gift schedules.
Internet and traditional sources disagree on the way in which early gift-giving takes place before the wedding ceremony.
Might it be possible to hand-deliver wedding gifts? Or must early gift-giving go through some delivery service?
Online and traditional sources appear to disagree on when one may start delivering or sending wedding gifts in advance of the ceremony.
Some sources consider receiving the invitation as the first day for early delivery or sending. Other sources designate 2 weeks in advance of the wedding ceremony as the start date.
Which timespan might your access to wedding etiquette be telling you?
A film that I recently watched advised not delivering or sending a wedding gift if such an action occurs 14 months and more after the wedding date.
Online sources appear to attach a one-year limit to gift-giving.
This is somewhat related, somewhat unrelated to wedding planning even as it may affect people who for whatever reason cannot or do not attend the ceremony.
What limit might you have come across in terms of timespan for getting a gift accepted by the newly and not so newly weds?
Your last subheading, Can You Do It in Two Weeks, contains an interesting first sentence anticipating that "Your next question would probably be: Can I have a wedding in less than 48 hours?"
The fifth sentence identifies Las Vegas as well-known as a state where bringing an identity card can get one married quickly, perhaps the quickest in the United States (unless there's a long line ;-D).
Perhaps much less known is eastern Tennessee.
It would be interesting to find out how many quick marriages, such as mentioned above, provoke a follow-up wedding ceremony and reception, wouldn't it?
The film version of The Puppet Masters did not have the option of buying wedding permissions at gas stations.
It will be interesting to read about it when I get to that part in the 1980s version of the original book from the 1950s.
Would that fast-food-type of wedding permissions have been accompanied by some kind of fast-tracked wedding-ceremony, wedding-reception planning?
The filmed and the written versions of The Puppet Masters are quite different.
Last week I finished watching the film version. This is the first week for my careful reading of the 1980s version, not the one you read since it has no unnamed blonde in the first chapter.
In light of your wizzley about redheads, I keep second-guessing how died-redheads Charlie and Sam and died- or natural-redhead Mary will fare if the torture scenes in the movie in fact were backed by pain-filled sessions in the book.
The least I will find out, should they prove based on book plot, will be whether or not Mary has less, more or similar pain levels to the two Cavanaugh men, correct ;-D?
The Wikipedia article on The Puppet Masters identifies a 1990 version that includes a nameless blond early on.
That episode is not in the public library edition that I'm reading. The latter is listed as a 1986 edition of the original 1951-copyrighted book.
Was there an interaction with a redhead in the first chapter of the version that you read?
Elsewhere, on another wizzley by you, I left a comment about the public library system here lending me a 1986 edition of the 1951-copyrighted The Puppet Masters.
The first chapter lets readers meet two men, who become redheaded for their secret mission, and a nameless woman who may or may not be naturally redheaded and whom the older of the two men characters monikers Mary.
Might this be the version that you read?
Thank you!
The library system here has a copy of The puppet masters as a 347-page book published in 1986 by Ballantine Books of New York with a 1951 copyright. I've ordered it to come to the branch library near me. Fingers crossed that it begins with a blonde with no name!