elmore jenkins

At first I thought it would be just a female Lord of the Flies. But no, it is much more. Always mesmerizing, often eerie, sometimes supernatural drama that explores immediate and future consequences when young minds are pushed to their limit by extreme circumstances. Visually stunning with a cast of brilliant actresses, notably Juliet Lewis and Melanie Jayne Lynsky.

A very banal movie, and ridiculously unrealistic. It has nothing to offer in the way of drama or comedy. As for any "serious" intent, it makes a few very common sense points that we are all familiar with from real life or other films: 1. the sandwich generation (caring for their children and parents) are stressed out, 2. the "senior years" are a void, 3. elderly who refuse to accept their physical limitations sometimes get hurt. On another note, the "grandma" scam depicted is widespread in real life and many do fall for it. Unlike this movie where the "villain" is an old guy who lives thirty miles away in California and is just trying to make ends meet, the real life villains are either in Bengal or Nigeria and bilking American and European elderly out of billions of dollars. The film might be entertaining to some senior citizens or younger folks whose entertainment standard is flopped network sitcoms.

I watched this because it was referred to in a NY Times essay as misogynistic and antisemitic, which was concerning. I think those characterizations say more about the essay writer than the series. Having said that, I found the series sophomoric and unrealistic. The lead male character is a rabbi yet there is barely a scene in which he does anything rabbinical; he mainly plays basketball and lies in bed with his girlfriend. Moreover, his life's dream is to be a rabbi of his own congregation, yet on the threshold of actualizing this dream he commits to a non-Jewish woman he just met who could never assume the very public role of a rabbi's wife. The female lead is supposed to be a clever and edgy podcaster, but she is neither clever nor edgy as a character; she is mainly shallow and anxiety-ridden. Both her parents and his parents are ridiculous caricatures. Best thing about the series is that "Jonah" from Veep plays the rabbi's brother.

It is so hard to quit smoking!

There is no way this movie would have been made had they not somehow gotten Anne Hathaway to star in it. The plot is purile and unrealistic in every way. I couldn't help think that someone instructed a not-ready-for-primetime AI program to write a screenplay about a boyband, human teenage girls, a middle aged woman, and the problems of celebrity.

If you were a child in the early 60s you will find this film to have many amusing moments. For younger audiences I expect it will just seem dopey. The scene with breakfast cereal mascots storming the Kellogg's corporate building a la Jan 6 with Tony the Tiger as QAnon Shaman was a nice touch, though one of the softest possible send ups of the rioters and the event. Finally, if you cannot appreciate Chef Boyardee doing the twist, this movie may not be for you.

The film deftly navigates past the issues surrounding the Terri Schiavo case without moralizing one way or another. In fact, the film's position statement is made by teenage Doris, the main character, in her high school classroom; essentially, one's moral position cannot come from a rule book (e.g., bible) or law, and the nuances of moral questions can look quite different to one in the throes of the moral dilemma than to an outsider. As elsewhere in the film, Doris, whose brother is terminal and in the same facility as Schiavo, is the most balanced and wise among the characters regardless of age. Doris's mother, Laura Linney, very convincingly portrays one common response to a tragedy beyond one's control; namely, she becomes pathologically controlling of everything that is within her control. This makes her unpleasant and unbearable. Woody Harrelson's character, who holds vigil outside the facility as one of the protesters against pulling the plug on Schiavo, effectively depicts another common human response to tragedy. After the sudden and unexpected death of his wife he projects his grief and sense of loss elsewhere and presumptuously crusades for a cause, more for his benefit than for the cause itself. The acting by the three leads is excellent and the plotline, which easily could have been maudlin or strident, unfolds delicately and touchingly.

I think this was supposed to be a film about the social dysfunction and catastrophic alienation between young men and women in the age of texting and social media. But there is no real explanation of why a college girl surrounded by bright and good-looking fellow students on a college campus would pursue the guy nearly twice her age who comes to the movie theater candy counter where she works and has "loser/weirdo" written all over him. The entire plot-line is unimaginative and banal, and the acting is mediocre. How anyone got the financing to make this waste of a film is vexing, and also angering when considering how many talented young filmmakers are out there who can't get to first base.

Frankenstein meets Pygmalion, or better yet, Barbie for a deep-thinking and offbeat audience. I haven't been as mesmerized by an actress's performance since Meryl Streep in Sophie's Choice. Emma Stone is brilliant. The film is visually beautiful, and the storyline is one you won't soon forget. One caveat: if you have studied psychology or neurodevelopment, leave all that at the door, otherwise you will find the trajectory of Bella Baxter absurd.