M: To start, I am an Amy Adams fan. I liked her when I first saw her in the Office. I think she was brilliant in Enchanted. But, when placed on the same screen with Meryl Streep, you can't help but draw comparisons, and they were not favorable to our little Amy. Likewise, I found myself drawing comparisons between Julie and Julia, and I reached the same conclusion. Julia Child is practically a historical figure, the persona of cooking. Julie, as far as I can tell, wrote a blog and cooked Julia's recipes. That they ended up on the same screen is unfair to Julia Child. Julia is absolutely masterfully played by Meryl Streep. It was perfect. Amy Adams did a commendable job portraying Julie, but she is no Meryl Streep, just as Julie is no Julia. Plus, I don't know, but I am guessing that Julie, not Julia, got all the money for this movie, which makes it feel, to me, a bit exploitative. It seemed like if I wrote a report about Winston Churchhill, and how awesome he was, and they made a movie about my report. The part of me is played by Keanu Reeves, and the part of Winston is played by Sir Anthony Hopkins. Is it fair, how does it compare? Is it just me? Am I going too far? Anyway, I didn't think the storyline was all that interesting, or half of the storyline anyway, and I am always left a bit in the dark when movies start talking about how "cooking saved my life." But, Meryl Streep was brilliant, as was Stanley Tucci, who played Child's husband. For that, I give the movie 3 stars.
V: M is right that the Julia part is the best part. But I do think the Julie part is valuable, too. Julie, an average person, was trying to accomplish something with her talent, and leaned on an established heroine to do it. It is motivating on both ends, both women going for their goals. Julie was a good vehicle in telling the story of Julia. So I think the Julie half was fine. That having been said, I think they could have done this movie just about Julia and it would have been awesome. I loved all those parts. Streep and Tucci were absolutely adorable and delightful. I did find the movie to be inspirational and fun. 3 1/2
*As a side note, it was interesting to watch this movie from my perspective - (from what other perspective could I watch it?) - that of a woman, wife, and mother. Julia was pretty much free to explore what she wanted, having relative good wealth, and a supportive husband. Julie had a supportive husband, and a day job - so adding this large project ended up straining her relationship with her spouse. Neither had children. So you start to wonder how much do you do? At what point does following your dreams stop being virtuous and becomes just self-indulgence? Just because Julie discussed the problem in the movie doesn't make the issue disappear. And, apparently, the real Julie's marriage has fallen apart. Balance is one of the hardest things to achieve. And good timing. Hmmmm.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
thought this movie was pretty fun, but could have done with more julia, less julie too. i liked that julia found something to be passionate about instead of moping that she couldn't have children, which she so badly wanted. makes me want to whine less.
we watched (500) days of summer after your review and i REALLY liked it. very well done and interesting and profound. thanks!
Post a Comment