Nora Ephron’s “Julie and Julia” has a unique narrative strategy. Two heroines sharing the same dilemma, “What am I going to be when I grow up?” This revelation signals the desire to live a meaningful life. Thirty year old Julie Powell and fifty year old Julia Child are feeling a tug on their souls.
It’s a rare for a female central character to have a supportive spouse and a healthy marriage, two in one film is monumental. The angst of finding a good man is missing in “Julie and Julia” instead we have two enviable relationships. How refreshing!
Both women come to the conclusion that food is the key to their personal success. Julie begins a rigorous challenge to prepare and conquer the 524 recipes in Julia Child’s revolutionary French cookbook “Mastering the Art of French Cooking” in 365 days. At a different point in history, Julia begins to study French cooking, leading to the creation of the aforementioned cookbook. Julie Powell has the challenge of working full time and producing glamorous food in her closet-sized kitchen. And Julia Child has to overcome, well…the French.
Many critics have already claimed that the double cream capacities of Meryl Streep as superb actor, and the perfect impersonation of a famous personality eclipsed the Julie side of the film. Amy Adams role was less meaty because she played the “Any-woman” who was lucky to be discovered. Her character gave women in the audience hope, but Meryl as Julia was incredible to watch. Adams might have been a better contender if she hadn’t portrayed a sanitized version of the real life Julie Powell. Perhaps it was a decision designed to hit a greater audience at the PG-13 rating.
It took awhile for me to digest this tepid film. The problem was, the pot never boiled. The crescendos leading to crisis create an attachment to the main character. After we identify with her, and what she needs, we want her to get it. When monsters, mountains, and mayhem get in the way, we become invested in the struggle. There weren’t any here. The few blips such as Julia getting into the advanced class with men, and Julie’s reporter not showing for dinner, drifted away like tumble weed.
Before you start your argument, let me remind you of the late Paul Harvey. He layered suspense, delay, and artful dodging, subtle forms of foreplay that make storytelling great. Be honest, we love tension, (not necessarily the Maury Povich kind) and a strong narrative structure demands a climax. An unreachable goal for our heroine to overcome is just more satisfying and delicious.
My recommendation is rental. Don't miss the experience of Meryl Streep as Julia Child, or the intriguing relationship with her husband played by sexy Stanley Tucci. How about a Julia Child mini-series starring Meryl Streep?
Bon Appetite!
It’s a rare for a female central character to have a supportive spouse and a healthy marriage, two in one film is monumental. The angst of finding a good man is missing in “Julie and Julia” instead we have two enviable relationships. How refreshing!
Both women come to the conclusion that food is the key to their personal success. Julie begins a rigorous challenge to prepare and conquer the 524 recipes in Julia Child’s revolutionary French cookbook “Mastering the Art of French Cooking” in 365 days. At a different point in history, Julia begins to study French cooking, leading to the creation of the aforementioned cookbook. Julie Powell has the challenge of working full time and producing glamorous food in her closet-sized kitchen. And Julia Child has to overcome, well…the French.
Many critics have already claimed that the double cream capacities of Meryl Streep as superb actor, and the perfect impersonation of a famous personality eclipsed the Julie side of the film. Amy Adams role was less meaty because she played the “Any-woman” who was lucky to be discovered. Her character gave women in the audience hope, but Meryl as Julia was incredible to watch. Adams might have been a better contender if she hadn’t portrayed a sanitized version of the real life Julie Powell. Perhaps it was a decision designed to hit a greater audience at the PG-13 rating.
It took awhile for me to digest this tepid film. The problem was, the pot never boiled. The crescendos leading to crisis create an attachment to the main character. After we identify with her, and what she needs, we want her to get it. When monsters, mountains, and mayhem get in the way, we become invested in the struggle. There weren’t any here. The few blips such as Julia getting into the advanced class with men, and Julie’s reporter not showing for dinner, drifted away like tumble weed.
Before you start your argument, let me remind you of the late Paul Harvey. He layered suspense, delay, and artful dodging, subtle forms of foreplay that make storytelling great. Be honest, we love tension, (not necessarily the Maury Povich kind) and a strong narrative structure demands a climax. An unreachable goal for our heroine to overcome is just more satisfying and delicious.
My recommendation is rental. Don't miss the experience of Meryl Streep as Julia Child, or the intriguing relationship with her husband played by sexy Stanley Tucci. How about a Julia Child mini-series starring Meryl Streep?
Bon Appetite!
Oh, mon ami . . . I can't believe you use the word "tepid" in the context of a review of this movie. First, I saw all sorts of PASSION for both Julia and Julie played out. Second, this was a film that portrayed two women, in definitely different eras for women, in the midst of finding their ways. Admittedly, Julia's husband was much more the supportive, vs. Julie's. That all said, commercially, the film will,and to some admitted degree of admission, is a chick flick. I say go see it in the theatres, and rent it as a refresher.
ReplyDelete-- signing as Shelly a Killer Bee Fan