web
counter
 

Young Adult Review: We Don't Have to Change at All

By Daniel Carlson | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (48)



Young-Adult-review.JPG

Young Adult feels like a bad dream. Actually, that’s not quite right. Dreams are accidental and uncontrollable, and no matter how unpleasant they become, it’s not as if you’re trying to make them as bad as they can be. Young Adult, though, was purposely written and directed to be as off-putting, grating, and disappointing as possible. It fails at every turn to give the viewer a reason to care about these people. It’s not as if every bad character in film or television program has to change into a good one, either. Off the top of my head here, Walter White is a twisted and dangerous man capable of genuine evil, but his every action is riveting because he’s doing these things for a reason. He has examined himself and determined both his interests and how to achieve them. He is willing to do what he feels must be done to reach a goal, and that goal is one that’s understandable to even the simplest viewer. He’s a step beyond us, but just barely. Similarly, the gleefully disingenuous Nick Naylor of director Jason Reitman’s own Thank You for Smoking wasn’t exactly a moral paragon, but he resonated as a character because, at heart, he was trying to do what he thought was right for his child and himself. The merits of that rightness are a separate issue; what matters is he made the choice. That’s why he’s a human being, and why the central character of Young Adult — young adult novelist Mavis Gary (Charlize Theron) — is a shell of a woman. Mavis is a regressive misanthrope chasing her own delusions, earning the pity of good people even as she tries to destroy them. Her goal is not a torqued version of one we might understand; it’s simply to act as selfishly as possible for as long as possible. Instead of being an interesting villain, she’s just vile.

What really makes Mavis’s whole non-arc so tragically bad is the way writer Diablo Cody and director Jason Reitman intercede at every turn to prevent her from gaining even an ounce of self-awareness. She begins and ends the film in the same state of bitter self-pity and total denial of the world around her, and this is a state that is actively condoned by the writing and direction. This is not an accidental thing. This is not a skewed or stretched reading of the material. Mavis does her best to hurt those around her and promptly skates away, as if she never had cause to do anything else. Bad characters don’t have to become better, but they do need to be recognizably human. We don’t have to enjoy their choices or condone them, but we do have to connect to that spark of humanity inside them that made them act that way in the first place. There’s no chance of that here.

Mavis lives alone in a kind of moral hibernation from the world, drifting listlessly around her Minneapolis apartment between fitfully working on the latest draft of a young adult novel that’s the culmination of a generic rip-off of the Sweet Valley High series. When the film begins, the series is being shuttered because of low sales — at one point a fleeting mention is made to the popularity of vampires, not jocks, in YA lit — and Mavis is procrastinating. She gets an email from her old high school flame, Buddy Slade (Patrick Wilson), announcing that he’s had a baby with his wife, Beth (Elizabeth Reaser), and is still living in their old hometown of Mercury, Minnesota. This is all the motivation Mavis needs to grab an old mix tape he made her and hit the road. Her plan is to get him back, wife and baby be damned. That probably sounds on paper like the plot of a comedy, but Young Adult is an aggressively dark drama, fueled by anger and confusion and the authorial feeling that cruelty, if not a virtue, is at least something that should be tolerated in the interest of letting everyone find themselves. There are no gags, no set ups, no teachable moments. Nothing but derision and self-destruction. Coming from a stodgy drama that pretends it’s a comedy, that’s a bad sign.

Theron is magnetic, though. There’s no denying it. In fact, it’s only her total command of the air around her that makes the film watchable for so long — we, like the people in Mavis’s life, fall under her spell a little. Mavis drives around Mercury, sneering at its shopping malls and chain eateries, eventually running into Matt Freehauf (Patton Oswalt), a classmate of hers who was beaten and left for dead by jocks who thought he was gay and whose identity absolutely escapes Mavis until he jogs her memory with the hate crime. They glom onto each other for the duration of Mavis’s trip; she needs someone to complain to, he wants someone to push him around. There’s a fascinating dynamic at play between them, and at times we’re presented with honest, crushing moments that illuminate the complex mix of loneliness and fear that drives them. (As Matt confesses one night, “Guys like me are born loving women like you.”) Reitman and Cody so often find themselves on the verge of real drama, which uses internal conflict to drive momentum. Just as quickly, though, that tension dissipates, and we’re back to watching Mavis ingratiate herself into Buddy’s life as she tries to come up with increasingly desperate and scathing ways to steal him for herself.

Oswalt is the film’s other star, and he brings the same ideal balance of self-pity and repressed anger that he did to Big Fan. Whether he’s got a legitimate dramatic range remains to be seen, but in narrow spaces, he’s fantastic. There are moments here that ask him to be more open and vulnerable than anything he’s ever done in the world of stand-up comedy, and he nails them. The rest of the fairly small cast is strong, too: Wilson’s perfectly suited to the role of easygoing former jock, while Reaser’s got a pleasant energy and gets to be a real woman, not just a cartoony wife nervously eyeing her husband’s ex. They’re all good players, and they all have their moments, but it’s just not enough.

This is darker and grimmer content than Reitman’s ever worked with, and it’s by far his least enjoyable film. But worse than that, it’s his least human. His directorial hand is more restrained than ever, but that restraint becomes silent condonation of the acts perpetrated by his lead. Cody’s cooked up a bitter brew, too. There is no wrestling with Mavis, and precious little understanding her. By the time a last-minute revelation is dropped in as an attempt to explain the source of her antisocial vitriol, we’ve gone too far to care. It also feels half-hearted at best considering the dozens of other ways the film underscores its support for Mavis’s behavior. The ending is so rushed and flat it feels as if the crew ran out of money and just went with what they had in the can, but no, it’s real. I won’t go into any details here except to say that the final moments are a ridiculous cop out, Cody’s own version of the kind of deus ex machina Mavis tacks onto her books, as the heroine briefly flirts with the idea of change or evolution and decides to just say fuck it and bail. It’s a handicapping of what could have been, if not an emotional journey, then the equally compelling first step that starts such journeys. It’s self-serving and bitter, ugly and reprehensible, a reinforcement of every bad thing we’ve spent 90 minutes trying to bear in the hopes it would be worth it. But it’s not. Not by a long shot. The closing credits scroll by to the strains of “When We Grow Up,” from Marlo Thomas’s “Free to Be … You and Me.” It’s the kind of generational culture reference that makes sense from Reitman and Cody (born in 1977 and ‘78, respectively), but its sly lines about never growing up and always staying the same take on a haunting cast. It’s possible the song is meant as a jabbing observation of Mavis’s neuroses, but given the film that’s come before, it just feels like a smug kiss-off. Because the truth is we do grow up, and we do have to change. Pretending otherwise is for, well, young adults. You can keep it.

Daniel Carlson is the managing editor of Pajiba and a member of the Houston Film Critics Society and the Online Film Critics Society. He’s also a TV blogger for the Houston Press. He tweets more often than he should, and he blogs at Slowly Going Bald.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy Review: I, Spy | Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows Review: The Wickedest Chess Match The World Has Seen









Comments

As usual, an incredibly well-written review, Daniel. It has dampened my enthusiasm for seeing it a bit, but maybe I'll be in the mood by the time it comes to my town. I love Patton Oswalt in just about anything.

I will say that in my experience, people don't really change. It's very hard to against your essential nature, and usually people don't want to make that sustained effort. And, just like dieting, eventually we'll revert to our starting shape.

Posted by: Jenne Frisby at December 16, 2011 1:34 AM

"She begins and ends the film in the same state of bitter self-pity and total denial of the world around her, and this is a state that is actively condoned by the writing and direction."

I stopped reading this review after this line showed up on the main page. Seriously guys? Can't you hide this shit behind the jump?

Posted by: Arrogant Ambassador at December 16, 2011 1:40 AM

Not really much of a spoiler. Just a creative way of saying the main character had no growth, no real arc. I've seen it put that way often and no one bitches.

I really like Theron in almost anything. Oswalt too. I still might see this, though I wasn't too keen on doing so to begin with, and the fact that the main character is a shitty, self-involved bitch doesn't sound very appealing.

Part of the reason I'm not as into a lot of the newer television shows is because the basis for most of their characters is a lot like that - the guys on The League are almost all amoral, as are the cast of Sunny and Workaholics, but add really stupid to the latter two and for some reason, that's all the creators saw fit to give us. I know all comedy is based upon pain, but you can still throw some heart and soul in there somewhere.

Posted by: Protoguy at December 16, 2011 3:31 AM

I didn't see anything about this movie until I came out of a movie and saw it among the other posters on the wall. I was like, "Is Charlize Theron trying to be Jack Black?" But I gave it the benefit of the doubt -- until I saw Diablo Cody was somehow involved. I know that some did/do love Juno around these parts, but that woman's shit smells exactly like the rest of ours. She's a hack and hasn't produced anything worthwhile besides that one-hit wonder. And even then, that's grating and just as unpleasant as what I'm assuming this movie's like. It was only really saved by the cast -- the supporting cast.

Good review, Daniel. You never leave questions as to why someone shouldn't go see a movie.

Posted by: duckandcover at December 16, 2011 4:35 AM

So "Shame", "I Melt With You", "We Need To Talk About Kevin" and now this. Who says there are no feel-good-holiday-spirit releases this December?
God, as if I weren't depressed enough.

Posted by: Irina at December 16, 2011 7:20 AM

Great review. I'll catch this on Netflix, probably.

I'm OK with the narcissistic bitch not evolving - that's how it is in real life. Totally agree with Jenne Frisby: People are who they are, and maybe only Biggest Loser contestants really undergo some magical "Journey" of self-change. At least until the finale.

I don't need a happily every after.

Posted by: the other courtney at December 16, 2011 8:38 AM

It's a shame that this isn't the black as coal dark comedy/compelling character study that I was hoping for, because I love Oswalt and Wilson, and have grown to really like Theron over the years. Plus, I still believe that Cody has a spark in her, and wish that United States of Tara had stayed on the air because I fucking loved that show. I'll probably see this at my local art house theater on a bargain Wednesday matinee, simply because I read another review that was very positive, and because I adore Patton Oswalt too much to ignore him.

Posted by: Kamikaze Feminist at December 16, 2011 8:57 AM

The growth thing isn't a spoiler at all. Did you see the trailer? She's rotten to the core and totally unaware of any personal flaws. There is not even a glimmer of hope in the trailer, unlike Bad Teacher where there were hints that another terrible character would at least be forced to confront reality at some point. This is like faulting a review of a musical for pointing out that the film ends with a song and dance number.

Great review. It looks like a film that's going to really be hit or miss with audiences. The raves applaud it for the same reasons you jeer it.

Posted by: Robert at December 16, 2011 9:23 AM

Irina, I think The Muppets might be just the panacea you need. Failing that, can I offer you something from my gingerbread menagerie? I have penguins!

On a scale of 1 to The English Patient, just how loathsome is Theron's character? Are we talking Cobb loathsome? In the Company of Men despicable? Does the movie achieve the vaunted heights of Cape Fear? A movie so vile that I stood up, announced I hated it in a significantly raised voice, and stormed out of the room?

Patton Oswalt and Charlize Theron ("Your looks have become a problem!", but in opposite ways) are a pretty tempting combination, I enjoy Diablo Cody's cleverclever writing, and I think Reitman is a capable director. I'm in. On Netflix, but mostly because I don't like to pay for a babysitter.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at December 16, 2011 9:35 AM

I saw this movie last week, and remember being surprised by all the good reviews. The only good thing in the movie was Patton.

Then I come to Pajiba and read a review which perfectly states while the film failed. Makes my day.

Posted by: Vick at December 16, 2011 9:44 AM

In real life, we don't like people like Mavis, but in a movie, we expect to see a little something extra, something deeper inside them. It sounds as if Cody didn't give us that and basically reproduced the external behavior without giving us any insight into her interior world. It sounds like lazy writing to me.

I just read a spoiler about the ending. You are so right.

Posted by: mograph at December 16, 2011 10:03 AM

"The raves applaud it for the same reasons you jeer it. "

Exactly. This review reads like one of Roger Ebert's where he criticizes the film for not appealing to his personal tastes or politics.

I think this movie looks fantastic and I want to see it for all of the reasons this reviewer seems to hate it. I love the idea of a cold-blooded antagonist as the lead character, it feels like a fresh idea. Really looking forward to this movie.

Posted by: Joe at December 16, 2011 10:04 AM

Normally these movies have to build towards something of a positive transformation. The reprehensible person sees the error of their ways and becomes a better person. I think what the film says is that while Mavis has not become a better person, she's now self-aware of who she is and likes who she is. "I'm a complete asshole but you know what? That's OK with me."

The theme of the movie maybe "We are who we are so get comfortable with it."

Posted by: Rum Cove at December 16, 2011 11:07 AM

So...I should see it?

Ok, I'll see it.

Posted by: DeistBrawler at December 16, 2011 11:49 AM

I'm guessing one of the other strippers was really mean to Diablo in her former career.

YOU KNOW WHAT YOU DID, ROXY.

Posted by: Craig at December 16, 2011 11:59 AM

I bet it was Amber. She just didn't get any of Diablo's jokes.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at December 16, 2011 12:05 PM

Oh, that Amber is such a bitch. You know she didn't pay for those boobs herself.

Posted by: Craig at December 16, 2011 2:58 PM

Mavis is a regressive misanthrope chasing her own delusions, earning the pity of good people even as she tries to destroy them.

So, this is some kind of training film?

Posted by: BierceAmbrose at December 16, 2011 5:36 PM

I watched the trailer after reading this review and was pleasantly surprised at how good it looks. I thought several of the scenes were rather amusing, such as one where she's shopping for a hot, new outfit and tells the sales clerk that it's not to impress her date, but to impress his wife. The clerk's stricken expression was great.

I mean, who doesn't like the idea of the prom queen/snotty bitch from high school ending up a miserable, rotten person? Er... just me, huh?

Posted by: snapnhiss at December 16, 2011 6:02 PM

She may be a self-involved asshole, but is she entertaining to watch? Does she have good lines? I don't really care if a character grows or changes as long as they're entertaining...consider George Costanza, or the cast of Always Sunny.

Posted by: Jesse M. at December 17, 2011 2:31 AM

The problem seems to be that Diablo didn't write an entertaining story as much as write a documentary of her characters. Sometimes, most times, people don't change, don't grow. That might be real, but it makes for an unsatisfying story.

Posted by: Protoguy at December 17, 2011 4:31 AM

I disagree with the claim that there is no change. Mavis was looking for a measure of validation for what had become of her life after she left for the Mini-Apple. I read her attempt to rescue Buddy Slade from normalcy as being less about reclaiming her past life at the expense of Beth, but more about proving to herself that her life is as glamorous as she pretends it to be when she dolls herself up at night. Getting Buddy to leave Beth would confirm that her marginal fame as a ghostwriter is still desirable despite declining sales, a descent into alcoholism, and the obvious effects of the climactic revelation.

That's what's so positive about her interaction with the Freehaufs. They're the only people that don't pity her: Matt, both with the personal tragedy of his own and his "guys-like-me/girls-like-you" crush; and Sandra, with a disturbing fascination for Mavis' celebrity that mirrors Mavis' continual viewing of "Kendra" and "The Kardashians."

The esteem boost that she gets from Sandra wanting to BE her is what fills the void that Mavis (at the beginning of the film) had assumed could only be satisfied by Buddy Slade leaving the type of family life that she can no longer have, and it allows her to begin her progress from a pathetic woman-child on the brink of self-destruction to a maturing, mean-spirited bitch who KNOWS that she is better than everyone else.

There's a change - it's just not a transition from being shallow to being sympathetic, but instead from being regretful and reflective to being truly confident and proud with her bad self.

Loved the movie, and not just because I drink Coca-Cola straight from the 2-liter.

Posted by: quoipourquoi at December 17, 2011 7:35 AM

Nailed it. I have not understood the praise critics have been heaping on this film. Patton and Charlize are great but in the end, why did I spend 90 minutes with them?

Posted by: JR at December 17, 2011 8:35 AM

quoipourpuoi, you should write for this site. That was a pleasure to read.

Posted by: snapnhiss at December 17, 2011 9:04 AM

I don't particularly enjoy Patton. In anything. That probably means I'm dead inside or something, but I've just never gotten it.

I mean, I'm ok with that. I really am. I don't really think I'm missing much.

Posted by: ZombieMedic at December 17, 2011 1:20 PM

I'm trying to figure out what kind of hard-on Diablo Cody has for brutalizing Patton Oswalt, because just from the description in the review, Mavis sounds like a seriously blown-out version of Tara's sister Charmaine.

Posted by: Jerry at December 17, 2011 9:31 PM

Sorry, Dustin. Love your reviews, but I won't even beg to differ here--just gonna tell you you're wrong. I saw the movie last night, and found it to be very well-done and well worth my time. Patton Oswald rocks in it and Theron is impressive as usual.

Posted by: Hello Kitty at December 18, 2011 12:51 PM

My name's Daniel. Dustin didn't write this review.

Posted by: Dan at December 18, 2011 3:02 PM

There is a danger with some reviewers... sometimes you pick up the vibe that something pissed them off in the opening moments and he or she never fully recovered enough to watch the film objectively.

i think Daniel completely missed the boat on this one. Which... (granted) is understandable with this particular film. But it's a shame because i think his irritation left him oblivious.

An early clue:
"Mavis drives around Mercury, sneering at its shopping malls and chain eateries..."

Now i don't know Daniel. Maybe he's too close to it, or he's too far removed to see it. Whatever. But this isn't a film about hating a small town. Yes that's in there, sure. But its more about the pain of returning home.

This scene with her sneering... She's specifically sneering at these crisp, brand new chain stores. Chain eateries that obviously wouldn't have been there 15 years ago.
The "KenTacoHut" for example. Commonplace in the big city, but a novelty in Mercury, it no doubt stands in a spot that she remembers as being something else. (It bothered her enough that she mentions it by name in another scene)

Remember she was a god in this town.
She certainly does.
But driving into town she sees that not even the familiar landmarks can be depended upon to remember her rule. They've been obliterated... just like her title. Her life.

.
Now i'm not saying this scene is crucial. It's about 4 seconds long.
i just point it out as one example of things that are working throughout this film - things that i think Daniel couldn't take in because something pissed him off much earlier.

Of course his opinion and his review is valid.
And wonderfully written. (Thanks, Pajiba.)
But i would caution readers who immediately respond: "Thanks for the review... I'll be sure and skip it." Don't let the chip on Daniel's shoulder keep you from seeing this film. I mean, this isn't Norbit or a Dan Fogler flick. It's Jason Reitman, dammit.
You should try it.

i found Theron captivating, and (the usually slappable) Diablo Cody's dialog is excellent.
It's the kind of film where characters betray themselves by the words they choose and not by what they mean to say.
And it's funny. Sorry Daniel. You're dead wrong.
Not funny ha ha, perhaps. Not even funny dark. Or funny cruel, even.
Funny sad.

Just give it a shot. m'kay?

Posted by: Scott at December 18, 2011 3:40 PM

NO. >:O

Posted by: duckandcover at December 18, 2011 4:38 PM

Oh-- it's a Diablo Cody film, no wonder it's a steaming kettle of over-wrought shit. Well, the college whelps will think its kewl.

Posted by: Mr. Stitch at December 18, 2011 9:55 PM

I just saw this, and it was great. I think Daniel must have been his own small town's "hate crime boy". That's why he couldn't relax and enjoy this dark comedy about bad people and the destructive power of high school.

One interesting thing I found was that Collette Wolfe and Patton Oswalt, who played siblings in Young Adult,have worked together before in Observe and Report, only she was the crippled one and Patton was the mean one.

Posted by: John G. at December 19, 2011 6:53 AM

I think often male reviewers miss the point of films that revolve around female characters. (Remember the review here of "It's Complicated," which is a fantastic character study?)

Some males miss what is going on with the characters because they don't have the life experience or emotional ability to relate. So I'm just saying, I wouldn't skip a film with a female main character (few and far between as they are) based on a bad review by a male. Just like guys seem to have an endless appetite and divine praise for movies like "Full Metal Jacket" and "Saving Private Ryan" which you couldn't pay me to watch.

Posted by: Anon at December 19, 2011 12:49 PM

Saw it and loved it.

I was a little annoyed with the ending until I read quoipourquoi's post which is spot on and made me love the movie even more.

I found myself hoping that Dan didn't do the review because of how eloquently he steers people away from good movies like this, but I'll admit it's not for everyone.

Posted by: Larold at December 19, 2011 8:11 PM

I saw it and I neither loved it or hated it, but I wish I had not paid $9.00 to see it. It's a Netflix film. I admit I expected a comedy but that's not why I didn't love the film. My first though on the film as a single woman was so either I'm a cat lady or I'm a self centered slob eating microwave dinners. Women never clean their houses or cook a meal if there is no man around to see it. But Theron was good in the role and I liked Oswalt as well. I wish they had had a better script or maybe a different script. It had moments when it worked and moments when the jokes (I assume they were jokes but I'm not sure) fell flat. I kept trying to figure out why she wanted this particular guy so badly but that never became clear. Then before you know she is off as if they whole thing never happened and is not important. As for the book series she was writing, well, I can see why it was being canceled.

Posted by: Michin70 at December 20, 2011 12:31 PM


this movie was garbage . dan nailed it but it wasn't worth
the wordiness. theron is an elite actress but noone could possibly
care about her character in the film. it's awful.

Posted by: snake at December 23, 2011 8:04 PM

Daniel, you seemed to have missed the point of the film - which is odd, seeing as you were obviously so affected by it. Deus ex machina??? I must've missed something. That's not what happened. You didn't like the film because it didn't give you what you were expecting. It didn't provide the Hollywood character arc. And had this been a matter of incompetence or accident, I would agree the movie was flawed. But as you pointed out, the writer and director intended it it that way. History will render a different outlook on this film. Mavis is a classic. A new archetype. She didn't do the sweet flip flop. She started to. But instead chose denial. That isn't irresponsible film making. No one wants to be Mavis - except for the geek's sister. And what does Mavis say to her when she asks to tag along to Minneapolis? "No, you're good here, Sarah." Genius. Too bad it went over your head. Watch it again. And by the way, it's a comedy because it's really flippin funny.

Posted by: Zack at December 24, 2011 12:45 AM

I just got back from seeing the film. I took it a whole lot different than you did, Daniel, and really loved it. I'm not going to get into my impressions of the character here. I think it is safe to say that suggesting Mavis is just this nasty unchanging character is short-changing what's actually happening in the film. You hint at it a bit with the roles everyone is playing, but even that's just scratching the surface.

Young Adult is a character piece about an unfulfilled professional writer. If you're looking for a rock solid plot and huge arcs, you're not going to find them.

And just because it tickles me so much: that's not Minnesota. That's Nyack, NY (or thereabouts). I should know. I drove past the KenTacoHut, Chili's, and Hampton Inn to get to the movie theater.

Posted by: Robert at December 26, 2011 3:41 PM

Not to jump on the bandwagon, but I'd agree that I don't get Dan's hate of the movie. It's pretty obvious that Charlize's character is supposed to be a bitch, so why fault her for being a bitch? And why would you prefer a predictable arc where she sees the error of her ways? I would've actually hated that ending.

Posted by: eeeeeeee at December 27, 2011 12:38 AM

I actually saw this movie last night, and it was almost uncomfortable to watch. I think there is something to the idea of someone beautiful and popular growing up given every pass, every advantage and then living in a world where those passes and advantages are taken away. Mavis was a god in this tiny little bubble, and then she entered the real world with real world problems and treatment. So of course she's unfulfilled. She never made the transition from big fish in a small pond to big fish in a bigger pond.

So, I think the reason she hates on Mercury so much is that she's only seen the way she wants to be seen in this "sad" little town. So she resents it as much as she still covets it.

And her writing those stories is a way to stay in that bubble and feel those feelings. So, of course, with the series being cancelled, she's confronted again with real world treatment.

She isn't worshipped in the real world. She's just another unhappy cog in an unhappy world. So, to her, the only recourse is to turn back time using Buddy. It's warped and sad, but utterly fascinating.

Posted by: Brian at December 29, 2011 10:19 AM

I personally thought the acting and writing in the movie were borderline brilliant.

Mavis doesn't HAVE to grow as a character or become more human. She is a very realistic picture of a person suffering from a cluster of personality disorders...narcissistic, borderline, antisocial. These people, by and large, do not have insight and do not "get better." Many go to therapy, take a handful of pills, and learn to imitate what they've been told is "socially acceptable" behavior. That's why showing Mavis that poster for demonstrating emotions to special needs children was so spot-on. Mavis is, herself, special needs.

Coming from a small town and having moved to and made good in the biggest "city" in my state after high school, I unfortunately identified far too much with Mavis. It was uncomfortable and unnerving. The whole film was an exercise in me covering my face with my hands.

If you miss this movie based on this review, you're really missing out.

Posted by: The Pink Hulk at January 2, 2012 11:44 AM

I wish I had read this review prior to watching the film!!!! It just ended about five minutes ago and my second wish consists of reversing time and getting those 90 minutes of my life back. This was probably the worst movie I have seen during the past year. I hated every minute of it.

Posted by: RedWineGal at January 4, 2012 1:25 AM

sad, disturbing movie. brutally real.
best movie i have seen in a while.
(but i like this kind of movie)

well-written review, but it seems like you saw it from the wrong angle.

reading comments...amazing how a bad review can influence a persons opinion before they even see a movie.

this reminded me of Greenberg, as a character study of an unstable adult getting older.

Posted by: steve m at January 7, 2012 12:13 AM

I'm glad I saw this movie - if anything it's a fascinating look at how we view women in society. In film after film we see leading men who are selfish drunks, after a girl with no care about the consequences, etc. You can even look at Reitman's other recent films as a reference for men who encompass bad behavior. Yet, more often than not we don't hate these characters - we feel sorry for them, we identify and root for them. It was so bizarre to see a women making similar choices and feel unnerved, even as a woman myself, watching her. I thought - "slut" "selfish brat" "alcoholic" -- In a weird way this film is really more about sexism and the double standard of our society than anything else. Honestly I think if this had been a story about a struggling isolated unhappy alcoholic MALE writer we'd be praising it with the same dignity as we gave The Wrestler, and a million other movies like it.

Posted by: mediamaven27 at January 7, 2012 5:44 PM

Owesome blog, respect

Posted by: pmp pdu at January 9, 2012 3:08 AM

"Thank you, wonderful task! This was the data I had to have."

Posted by: Kandace Courtway at January 9, 2012 10:34 PM

Can't wait to see it. Thanks mediamaven for your perceptive comments.

Posted by: Clare M at January 22, 2012 8:18 PM

Watched this last night and really enjoyed it; Mavis and my sister share similar, self involved, bitch genes.

At the same time, I kept thinking 'Is this another Tara character?'. I love Tara, I am royally pissed it got axed. Something about this made me keep thinking of Tara, either it's Theron's mannerisms or the dialogue or I don't know, like Mavis has some T going on there.

Great movie. Very thought provoking stuff. And Patton is just brilliant in it.

Posted by: Fuckchop at January 30, 2012 10:45 PM