criterionforum.org

It's both.

In the former, there were some terrible choices for placement of certain songs, as far as the context of the lyrics not matching that of the film. The best example would be when Juno finally realizes she loves Bleeker, the song played has very intrusive lyrics about someone suggesting that they shouldn't be trusted or loved for threat of breaking hearts, in this scene, it plays terribly).

I would say that the use of music at all in this film falls along the classic critique of music trying to lead the audience by the ear with emotions. I've never enjoyed this technique, and Juno didn't change that. Putting that much emphasis on music, if in all the dialogue stops/music stars cues, or in all the constant ham-fisted referencing(favorite bit: Showing a Mott the Hoople cd on the bottom of the stack Juno's holding, yet she had it at the top, too, WE GET IT!!!)

Disclaimer: No, this type of music is not in my tastes at all(nor is this film). I hated Hole when "Doll Parts" was first released and was just as baffled to see it used in this film(again, contexts don't match at ALL, unless it's "wearing my tastes on my sleeve" that they were after).

The motivation for the songs is also what bugged me. There's this underlying conversation in movies to choose songs that no one has heard before, or to choose songs that were forgotten and now appear in a new kitchy context, or to choose music that makes he who chose it appear to have good taste. I'm glad most talk of cinema does not include this sub-conversation since it really has less to do with cinema and more to do with the director. But I think it could be telling of the motivations of the director. If you suspect the soundtrack was trying too hard, much like a 7th grader giving a mix tape of cute songs to his crush, then it's not off to suspect other choices of the director were made with the same intent.

With Juno, I do think the soundtrack tries to hard, and it often creates a tone that doesn't exist in the movie. For instance, the ending is kinda fair, but they use this "cute" Moldy Peaches song to make it warm and fuzzy. But there's something really bothersome about music like Moldy Peaches, not quite to the level of Watkins's Privilege, but bothersome and ingenuine nonetheless. And their songs almost solidified the film for me as being just as ingenuine, after willing to be on the fence for some of the better parts of it.

Also, songs reference cheating in Nintendo in order to get a softy "aww" of retrophasia from girls who may not know they are slowly being lured into giving head, it kinda cheapens the movie.

EDIT: Clarification--

"B-A-B-A-Up-Down-Up-Down-Left-Right-Start
Just because we both cheat doesn't mean we're not smart.
I don't see what anyone can see in anyone else but you."

There's a new litmus test to determine the pH of film enthusiasts.

The criteria? Little Miss Sunshine and Juno. I've seen friendships ended over the love/hate these films generate.

Life was once a box of chocolates...now life is "one fucking beauty contest after another." While Hollywood used to be a lot more transparent with their cheddar-peddling hijinks, they now masquerade as Indie Filmmakers, hitting the Sundance circuit, combining forces with heavyweight shoegazers like Sufjan Stevens and Cat Power. In either case, sentimentalism prevails and if you don't lap it up and ask for more, well, you're just a spoilsport.

I wouldn't call using an artist's work "joining forces," but I'm a bit overprotective when it comes to music (especially Sufjan Stevens) and that's a whole different conversation right there.

Just saw this. Have to put this at the top of my best of the year list. It's an instant classic, and I believe Diablo Cody will surely get nominated for Best Screenplay (and perhaps even win!?). It's amazing how many scripts she has out now. I wonder if she'll be the next Charlie Kaufman even though she's pouring through so many different genres... I want to see this again very soon. For me, it somehow feels like the perfect follow up to Rushmore... if that makes any sense. It's smart, sly, colorful, warm and just as great, if not more, and for entirely different reasons all the same... I just can't believe we had two great high school teen comedies this year - Superbad - and they're both unlike anything we've seen before. What a gift!

Has anyone followed the writer before the film came out? I've only now just found this thread, so if it's all in here, I apologize!

exte wrote:Has anyone followed the writer before the film came out? I've only now just found this thread, so if it's all in here, I apologize!

You're in for a treat in the last few pages.

Glad to have someone on the team

The film is pleasant enough, but I couldn't help but wonder, as others have already here, why such a simple story was inflated and disturbed by so many faulty foundations (jargon delivered at half a mile a minute, that awful music, anything Juno's best girlfriend ever said, faded iconography disguised as authenticity, etc.), I did find some minor pleasure in a few moments (Cera, Simmons & Janney's, respectively), but when they're supported by a city of string and dry spit, it's not any different from National Treasure 2, in terms of passing the time. It could have easily been a wonderful short film, but as a feature, the story's promise feels overfed and trite. As for Reitman's directing style, it's as if he sent off six million in bread & a few proofs of purchase from his old vhs editions of Stripes and sent off for "The Director's Kit" (forward by Mitchell Leisen and Mark S. Waters). And as for the Academy Awards, they take kindly to mimicry, so I'm sure Ms. Page will be a shoo-in for her portrayal of Diablo "Juno MacGuff" Cody. The fact that we're still talking about this movie is truly a sign of worse to come, and I accept my role in that downfall, and I apologize in advance. In fact, I'm going to go wash my hands right now. And maybe my brain.

Saw this tonight and I thought it was very good, but not the indie miracle comedy some are claiming. Like a few others, for me the film took a good twenty minutes to find it's tone and stride (actually when Juno first meets the adoptive parents). As for the dialogue I certainly understand the complaints about its awkwardness. But forgive the analogy, but it was like when I watched a David Mamet film for the first time. It took me a while to get the cadences but soon enough it didn't bother me. I'm sure when I see the film again, it won't seem so strange. As per the authenticity, for me, the dialogue is no different than the random association conversations I have with my friends when we get together to hang out. It's something that built out of collective experiences, and for me, that kind of rung true in the film. I also identified with the hipster vibe of the film, because I was in that milieu for much of my high school/college years. The characters rung pretty true to me. And I couldn't help but laugh at the "jocks-like-freaky-chicks" bit, because it's true. What struck me most about the film was the heart. That was nothing but sincere, and Diablo Cody handles the turns in the script in the last twenty minutes or so really well.

Yep, the film certainly has it's flaws. It's structurally weak, and the tone takes a while to get established. But that said, the payoff is worth it and the performances are solid all around. But no, this ain't Oscar material.

Antoine Doinel wrote:t was like when I watched a David Mamet film for the first time. It took me a while to get the cadences but soon enough it didn't bother me.

It's been over 30 years since I first encountered David Mamet's dialogue. I haven't gotten used to it yet. I hate it.

What Antoine said.

I also credit Reitman and his male actors for fully fleshing out the script. Cody's insight into the three main females at such vastly different points in their lives was astounding -- the fact that they were all wonderfully performed certainly helped as well -- but the male characters all seemed a little underwritten. Not poorly written, mind you; just tapped into less. Reitman's direction as well as Cera, Simmons, (and especially) Bateman's performances turned what would have been a strong feminine picture into a strong picture, period.

So I cringed at a few quirky lines (but most certainly not the Argento & punk conversations -- those were written as true as true can be for a fan of something they were never truly able to be a part of); on the whole Cody knows her shit about the hilarity and tragedy of the human condition. Juno worked for me.

-Toilet Dcuk

toiletduck! wrote:What Antoine said.

I also credit Reitman and his male actors for fully fleshing out the script. Cody's insight into the three main females at such vastly different points in their lives was astounding -- the fact that they were all wonderfully performed certainly helped as well -- but the male characters all seemed a little underwritten. Not poorly written, mind you; just tapped into less. Reitman's direction as well as Cera, Simmons, (and especially) Bateman's performances turned what would have been a strong feminine picture into a strong picture, period.

For someone who seems to have spent most of his career doing forgettable television shows of questionable quality, Bateman is an enormously subtle actor. I don't think anyone who likes Arrested Development is unaware of how talented he is, but what he does in Juno is still very surprising. Especially the way he's able to demonstrate multiple hidden, perhaps confused, interior states within the character while still keeping intact the facade the character uses around people; and he does so in a manner that makes us believe this interiority goes unnoticed by the majority around him. There's no winking. That cannot be easy.

Michael Cera has an uncanny ability to make geeks out of something original. It's not just a body of known affectations. In fact just about everyone in the main cast makes at least one unexpected and pleasant choice.

For me the Bateman-Garner scenes were the only truly great, smart thing in it. I wish the whole damn movie could have been about them. Still, even that stuff is very nearly wrecked from moment to moment. For instance, the scene at the end in which Garner "meets her son" is extremely touching and carefully handled until Janney appears at the door and we get treated to a totally unnecessary appended dialogue meant to ensure that we are in fact moved by this moment. Also, I disagree with hot locket's earlier suggestion that the Bateman character is motivated to do what he does because of his feelings for Juno. I don't think that's what is being suggested there at all. The brilliance of that whole arc is that Juno's presence (and by this I mean what she represents, not just her status as a young hottie who is into old man Bateman) motivates a fracture within the yuppie couple's relationship which had been clearly burgeoning beforehand. It just needed a final push. For Cody (or someone) to recognize the ways in which the central dilemma effects lesser seen but equally relevant dramas is remarkably smart.

So, because this movie at least had that going for it, I responded to it more favorably than Knocked Up which I felt was ultimately just disposable.

BTW, what was the general reaction to the sonogram scene? I was pretty irritated with it personally as it seemed designed to be read primarily as about Janney's relationship to Juno; in other words, it's meant to solidify their bond of family. That's fine but it does so at the expense of the very real issue that was being brought up by the tech, whose profession (rather than her professionalism) is then unaccountably brought into question. I realize we're supposed to read this as Janney's heat o' the moment invective but it still sits poorly with me because we're not necessarily supposed to call her on it either.

I guess the reason that it bothers me to the effect that it does is because there's a very real point to be considered here and it's being dismissed as though it's simply irrelevant or tangential to the tech's supposedly class conscious prejudice. My mom was a clinic nurse for many years and said that the teen parents were always amongst the most enthusiastic. Now obviously this is partly due to naivete but, unless they're from the Spears family and have a ready bankroll, shouldn't economic and social circumstances trouble them? Shouldn't that be their default attitude if they are going to have one? For Janney's character to turn the discussion into one about morality is beside the point and more than a little willfully disingenuous on somebody's part.

"Juno" has earned $71.25 million after six weeks. The award season favorite is a day away from surpassing 2004's "Sideways" ($71.5 million) to become the most successful film for Fox Searchlight, News Corp.'s art-house distributor.

exte wrote:"Juno" has earned $71.25 million after six weeks. The award season favorite is a day away from surpassing 2004's "Sideways" ($71.5 million) to become the most successful film for Fox Searchlight, News Corp.'s art-house distributor.

That's because the church has adopted this film as a message against anti-abortion. If Passion of the Christ has taught me anything, it's that churches go out in flocks if they are told to. How do you think Tyler Perry keeps making his shit?

Juno isn't making all that money because of the fucking "church," it's making it because of word of mouth and the extraordinary ratings it has. Go to rottentomatoes, and you'll see it's the only one in the top five with decent ratings of any kind. You know, I didn't go to "church" yesterday, but I'm damn sure I wouldn't be told to just go buy tickets. And I hate how you lop Tyler Perry into this, too. Why does everyone have nothing but venom for people who achieve success? And of all people, Tyler Perry deserves it. It's not like he hooked up with the "church" and got his audience out of the gate!

This week's sermon: "The Doodle That Can't Be Undid"

Jeff wrote:This week's sermon: "The Doodle That Can't Be Undid"

"In Hell you will find fire, brimstone, and Rainn Wilson's cameo run on a loop."

I've been interested in seeing Juno ever since I first heard about it when it started hitting the festivals (way, waaay before its popularity skyrocketed), but its remained on the backburner on my list of films to see simply because there has been so much released in the last month.

Well, it's a lovely little film, beautifully crafted and performed, and it moves along perfectly with a very sweet and almost nostalgic tone. There’s an infectious rhythm and tempo that’s compelling, and in its own way, very impressive. I found it terribly moving at certain points, but it's also one of the funniest films I've seen in recent memory. Ellen Page is as great as everybody's saying she is, but the rest of the cast is nearly as appealing (Bateman and Garner are particularly excellent). There's even a great main title sequence. I loved the final shot, with the characters attempting to find harmonization and that perfect final detail before the cut to black...

The screenplay is aces, and I for one found it an absolute joy to listen to - I particularly enjoyed the liberal and frank utilization of sexual slang. I also got the very real sense during the running time that a unique screenwriter’s vision is taking root. Juno is terrific, I think, but if her progression is straight up in all ways, I won't be surprised in the least if Diablo Cody pens a masterpiece sooner or later. She strikes me not only as somebody with a whole hell of a lot to say, but also with a unique voice and conviction to say it with. I look forward to whatever she does next.

I can't believe the desecration Juno's receiving on here, but if you must, count me as part of the fan club.

domino harvey wrote:

Jeff wrote:This week's sermon: "The Doodle That Can't Be Undid"

"In Hell you will find fire, brimstone, and Rainn Wilson's cameo run on a loop."

the horror, the horror.

Dylan wrote:I can't believe the desecration Juno's receiving on here, but if you must, count me as part of the fan club.

Actually, it's been far too long (about a page) since someone has reiterated the obvious: that JUNO is the most irritating, smug film of the year by some distance.

Thank you. If anything, I've seen far too little criticism of this movie in this thread. To bring up another of the film's crimes, can we briefly address how racist the character of the 'Engrish'-speaking Asian girl outside the abortion clinic is?

"HA! She's a chink! She can't speak English right! A-hyuk!" If that had been a black or Hispanic character ignobly tripping over subject-verb agreements, we'd recognize it for the hateful portrayal it is.

portnoy wrote:Thank you. If anything, I've seen far too little criticism of this movie in this thread. To bring up another of the film's crimes, can we briefly address how racist the character of the 'Engrish'-speaking Asian girl outside the abortion clinic is?

"HA! She's a chink! She can't speak English right! A-hyuk!" If that had been a black or Hispanic character ignobly tripping over subject-verb agreements, we'd recognize it for the hateful portrayal it is.

Or maybe we'd all say, "You know, some people don't speak English as well as other people. Oh well" and stop being offended by everything.

rs98762001 wrote:

Dylan wrote:I can't believe the desecration Juno's receiving on here, but if you must, count me as part of the fan club.

Actually, it's been far too long (about a page) since someone has reiterated the obvious: that JUNO is the most irritating, smug film of the year by some distance.

Coming from a poster who doesn't have a good word to say about anything, that means absolutely nothing.

Napoleon wrote:

rs98762001 wrote:Actually, it's been far too long (about a page) since someone has reiterated the obvious: that JUNO is the most irritating, smug film of the year by some distance.

Coming from a poster who doesn't have a good word to say about anything, that means absolutely nothing.

Inappropriate descent in to childish name-calling -- and manifestly not true. One can find many films this poster has said good words about.