Also, the movie that is the epitome of what David is describing is a film he really enjoyed from this year: Paul Weitz’s Grandma. That is easily a Top 5 worst of the year for me. That movie was made for smug, white liberals to watch, sit back and feel satisfied at how they are on the “right side of things” (full disclosure: I myself am a white, male liberal who is unabashedly pro-choice).
The movie is so safe, easy, and there is only one scene with any emotional truth; Sam Elliot’s scene. I initially felt bad for feeling that way because this movie should be a showcase for well developed female characters but then I remembered that it was written and directed by a man and I believe that is the root of the problem. It feels like it was written by the worst kind of ally; I can feel Paul Weitz wanting a pat on the head for doing “a good job” instead of actually feeling anything and bringing some truth to the movie. It is the complete opposite of last year’s fantastic, Top-10 for me, Obvious Child. That was written and directed by a woman and it shows in every respect.
Jessica Kiang of The Playlist wrote a great article on Oscar-Bait/Hollywood message movies and how they are not on the forefront of societal progress. They are merely jumping on the bandwagon of progress already in motion. Obvious Child is the honest, passionately felt film dealing with abortion. Grandma is the soulless, desperate, milk-toast, Hollywood bandwagon version.
“In and Out” isn’t exactly a realistic movie, but yes, there are some gay men and women who say they had no idea they were gay until well into middle age. I’m not entirely sure why; I guess it’s just case at being very good at suppressing your emotions. Likewise, I could definitely see a 20 something trans person not realizing they’re trans until then, especially 100 years ago, when there would be no literature or pop culture fiction for them to draw on and learn even what being trans is.
I’m happy to admit that I liked Me & Earl & the Dying Girl quite a lot. It did seem pleased with itself and its own cleverness at times, but I feel like the film knew how smug it was being, so was almost able to comment upon its own smugness by overstating its aesthetic and tone. To me, it is a film of intertextuality, one that actively acknowledges and laughs at the very type of audience that takes this stuff too seriously. I dislike all the other films mentioned as a comparison to Me & Earl & the Dying Girl; this one felt somehow different, more engaged, and less afraid to just completely go full ‘indie’, which is normally something that would annoy me, however, I admire the film’s anti-subtlety in driving a distinct cinematic structure and form.
I laughed on many occasions, and felt surprisingly emotional (for me) during the film’s climatic scene. I don’t feel like the film’s themes were too romanticised or overstated, just the form of which they were constructed within; this created an interesting parallel between quite a soft, emotional core, incased by a harshly, metatextual external casing, which, for me, was interesting to watch.
I can easily tell why some viewers would be very turned-off by the film; it can, at times form itself into ‘maximum quirky’ mode, yet I still think that the film is laughing at itself, a paradoxical pastiche of the very films that wish to be as self-reflectant as Me & Earl & the Dying Girl, yet rarely are brave enough to be so.
Hated Me & Earl & the Dying Girl, dislikes Ben Folds Five, disliked 50/50, LOVED Short Term 12. You’re theory is bunk Mr. Bax!
Also, the movie that is the epitome of what David is describing is a film he really enjoyed from this year: Paul Weitz’s Grandma. That is easily a Top 5 worst of the year for me. That movie was made for smug, white liberals to watch, sit back and feel satisfied at how they are on the “right side of things” (full disclosure: I myself am a white, male liberal who is unabashedly pro-choice).
The movie is so safe, easy, and there is only one scene with any emotional truth; Sam Elliot’s scene. I initially felt bad for feeling that way because this movie should be a showcase for well developed female characters but then I remembered that it was written and directed by a man and I believe that is the root of the problem. It feels like it was written by the worst kind of ally; I can feel Paul Weitz wanting a pat on the head for doing “a good job” instead of actually feeling anything and bringing some truth to the movie. It is the complete opposite of last year’s fantastic, Top-10 for me, Obvious Child. That was written and directed by a woman and it shows in every respect.
Jessica Kiang of The Playlist wrote a great article on Oscar-Bait/Hollywood message movies and how they are not on the forefront of societal progress. They are merely jumping on the bandwagon of progress already in motion. Obvious Child is the honest, passionately felt film dealing with abortion. Grandma is the soulless, desperate, milk-toast, Hollywood bandwagon version.
So yea, I didn’t like Grandma.
I know it must be screerer season when I’m seeing all the same movies as you.
Also, I wrote a little about 99 HOMES here: http://battleshippretension.com/ebertfest-2015-day-four-by-aaron-pinkston/
“In and Out” isn’t exactly a realistic movie, but yes, there are some gay men and women who say they had no idea they were gay until well into middle age. I’m not entirely sure why; I guess it’s just case at being very good at suppressing your emotions. Likewise, I could definitely see a 20 something trans person not realizing they’re trans until then, especially 100 years ago, when there would be no literature or pop culture fiction for them to draw on and learn even what being trans is.
I’m happy to admit that I liked Me & Earl & the Dying Girl quite a lot. It did seem pleased with itself and its own cleverness at times, but I feel like the film knew how smug it was being, so was almost able to comment upon its own smugness by overstating its aesthetic and tone. To me, it is a film of intertextuality, one that actively acknowledges and laughs at the very type of audience that takes this stuff too seriously. I dislike all the other films mentioned as a comparison to Me & Earl & the Dying Girl; this one felt somehow different, more engaged, and less afraid to just completely go full ‘indie’, which is normally something that would annoy me, however, I admire the film’s anti-subtlety in driving a distinct cinematic structure and form.
I laughed on many occasions, and felt surprisingly emotional (for me) during the film’s climatic scene. I don’t feel like the film’s themes were too romanticised or overstated, just the form of which they were constructed within; this created an interesting parallel between quite a soft, emotional core, incased by a harshly, metatextual external casing, which, for me, was interesting to watch.
I can easily tell why some viewers would be very turned-off by the film; it can, at times form itself into ‘maximum quirky’ mode, yet I still think that the film is laughing at itself, a paradoxical pastiche of the very films that wish to be as self-reflectant as Me & Earl & the Dying Girl, yet rarely are brave enough to be so.