"It's Complicated."

This past weekend, while my mom visited, we went and saw the latest Meryl Streep movie, "It's Complicated." (Though it's hard to say what is the 'latest' since she does so many films). My mom is a big Meryl fan, so I knew taking her to see this while she visited was the thing to do. She was not too thrilled with the thought of seeing "Avatar."

The film is a romantic comedy larded with predictable formula, but it was entertaining for a one time shot. If it weren't for the actors in the film--notably Meryl, this would have sucked, since the writing was not good enough to sustain itself on its own. Steve Martin takes on a new type of character, in that, he is shy and reserved and not the usual Steve Martin. So in other words, he has to act. Also, Roger Ebert noted the ridiculous size of her fancy house--even when we left the theatre I asked my mom, "How does a baker afford such a large house in California?" I mean, the property taxes have to be through the roof. 

There is a funny scene where Alec Baldwin (Meryl's ex that she is having the affair with) and she are fooling around in a hotel room. He, in turn, passes out, and has to call a doctor. When the doctor arrives, he informs him that he is on Flomax, a drug that is known for a "decrease in semen." Then Alec adds, "This isn't good for my wife," (referring to his young wife who wants to get pregnant)--but the doc thinks that the 60ish Meryl is his wife. Meryl, in turn, responds with: "I prefer lots of semen."

It is nice that some movies are being geared for an older audience (in terms of casting) but this is one of those popcorn movies you watch once and never bother having to watch again. This isn't "Another Woman," after all.

Julie & Julia.

I went with my mom to watch the Nora Ephron film Juilie & Julia over Thanksgiving, and although I enjoyed the movie on an an emotional level, it is probably a film that I liked more than thought was good. Ephron's movies are generally fun and witty (with exception for You've Got Mail which sucked) but they're not overly deep or inventive.

Julie & Julia, however, had some really good moments and then some not so good. In fact, the dullest part of the film was the whole Julie Powell life/character, for I have yet to see why she was even needed in the film. The parts involving Meryl Streep, her cooking classes, and her life in France were all far more interesting, and as usual, Streep delivers a convincing role.

An interesting point was made by The Seattle Times reviewer, who noted: "Every time, I have a wildly mixed reaction: The Streep scenes are genius. The Adams scenes -- why???

"If you, like me, are a connoisseur of romantic comedies, you immediately recognized that Adams is doing Meg Ryan, specifically from "You've Got Mail": the cutely nonthreatening haircut, the perky way she bobs her head when she types at her computer, the childlike whining, the chirpy voice ("I have thoughts!"). It's a fairly uncanny imitation when you think about it, but it's no accident -- Nora Ephron, who wrote and directed both "Julie & Julia" and "You've Got Mail," wrote the character that way and directed her that way." 

I pretty much agree with this reviewer's thoughts on the film, though I must mention that upon leaving the theatre, I was left in a foul mood. Why? Because there is a scene where the Julie Powell character is bombarded with book offers and lit agent offers after an article on her appears in the NYT; and so, I must ask, why is a cooking blog worthy of a book? At least Julia Child invented her own recipes. But all Powell did was cook someone else's invention and blog about it, and yet this is worthy of a book? When I watch how hard Dan works for Cosmoetica, from his excellent film reviews and criticism, to his great poetry, to his memoirs and fiction, to his interviews, all of these things are peerless, and yet because he doesn't appeal to the Lowest Common Denominator, he has to work all the harder. After all, it simply doesn't take any brain power to understand a cooking blog. And apparently a number of Julia Child's fans dislike her, believing that Powell just mooched off Child's fame.

But all this aside, perhaps the most nauseating part of the film was seeing (or rather hearing on her answering machine) these publishers and agents acting like lap dogs. Ooh! You've had an article on you in the NYT. Clearly you're "somebody" now! And after a while, it is hard not to tire of hearing the Julie Powell character boast about being a "real writer" now that she's published. Yawn. Unfortunately, this is how drones think. Overall, the film is worth the watch for Streep's performance, but about the only thing more boring than commenting on someone's blog post is watching a movie about someone writing a blog. Check out the trailer below:

Ironweed

Just followed up with writer William Kennedy for a DSI, and seeing Jess's mention of him, below, as Man's Man, made me think of the film version of his great novel, Ironweed.

Frankly, the film falls far short of the novel. Jack Nicholson is just poorly cast, as is Meryl Streep. Francis Phelan could have been Gene Hackman or some smaller 'name'.

Still, a solid film. Here is the trailer: