criterionforum.org

This seems to me to be the kind of film that one judges on the basis of a standard issue trailer at one's peril. This could either be decent or very bad -- based on the traler I saw. I think I'd have to know what the ending was before I could even begin to guess how I'll ultimately categorize this.

The trailer linked to at the top of this thread actually makes the film appear a lot more honest and insightful than it really is. Plus, it utilizes all three of the script's good jokes.

rs98762001 wrote:The trailer linked to at the top of this thread actually makes the film appear a lot more honest and insightful than it really is. Plus, it utilizes all three of the script's good jokes.

That's depressing to hear. Could you PM me as to how the film ends -- I have a worst case scenario guess that I suspect might be the case.

justeleblanc wrote:It's that subversive cute thing again. When will it just die?

I think this lies at the heart of my lack of enthusiasm for the film. I'll preface this by saying that I haven't seen the film, only the trailer. I do know things about the general path the plot takes. So, this is by no means a definitive judgment and is probably not so fair to the movie, but I intend to see it with an open a mind as possible, so whatever.

The thing that bugs me about this is, from the trailer, it almost seems like the Juno character is something of an indie kid pin-up girl--she's sassy, quick-witted, precocious, cute in that left-of-center way, etc. However, I don't get the sense that this character is going to have any significant flaws, or any serious conflicts over her situation. Take, for example, the scene where she tells her parents about the pregnancy, which is available as a clip. This is what she tells them:

I'm pregnant. But I'm gonna give it up for adoption, and I already found the perfect couple, they're gonna pay for the medical expenses and everything, and in 30-odd weeks we can just pretend that this never happened.
(Dad: You're pregnant)
I'm sorry, I'm sorry, and if it is any consolation, I have heartburn that is radiating to my kneecaps, and I haven't taken a dump since... Wednesday...morning.

The first part of it works, I guess, but would any 16-year-old, hipster or not, really go into the heartburn thing? It feels more like a screenwriter's construct than anything authentic. I get the feeling that I won't get much out of this film if the main character is going to quip her way through her life crises. Again, maybe I'm reading it completely wrong, if so someone who has seen it can correct me.

A good way to look at it is to contrast it with Rushmore, a personal favorite of mine. One of the reasons the movie is a success is that Anderson/Wilson aren't afraid to depict Max Fischer in a less than flattering light. I'll quote the dialogue below, taken from a copy of the script I'm looking at online. I think the wording might be a little different in the film but it plays out the same way:

"MAX: You honestly believe you love Blume instead of me?
MISS CROSS: Yes.
MAX: Stop. If you don't stop with that ping-pong talk, I'm going to lose it. Do you understand me?

Max takes Miss Cross' hand and kisses it. She pulls her and away. Max tries to embrace her. They struggle and Miss Cross overpowers Max. She holds his arms behind his back.

MAX: Let me go!

Max struggles some more. Miss Cross pushes him hard across the room. Max smashes into some chairs and knocks over a desk. He yells at her:

MAX: I got kicked out because of you!
MISS CROSS: You got kicked out because -
MAX: Rushmore was my life. Now you are!

Silence.

MISS CROSS: What do you really think is going to happen between us? You think we're going to have sex?

Max looks shocked.

MAX: That's kind of a cheap way to put it, don't you think?
MISS CROSS: Not if you've never fucked before, it isn't.
MAX: Oh, my God.
MISS CROSS: How would you put it to your friends? Do you want to finger me? Or maybe I could give you a hand job in the back of a Jaguar. Would that put an end to all of this?

Miss Cross moves towards Max with her hand outstretched. Max retreats backwards, banging into desks and chairs. Miss Cross stops.

MISS CROSS: Please. Get out of my room.

Max walks out of the room and stands in the doorway.

Miss Cross turns away and goes back to taking down her maps from the wall. Max watches her for a minute.

Max leaves. "

This is a scene that's crucial to the film's success. Rushmore takes place in Wes Anderson's trademark melancholic fantasy world (perhaps less so than his later films), but this scene, above all others, establishes a believable and relatable interpersonal dynamic. Max's personality and actions affect other people, something this scene makes very clear. Up to this point in the film, we're kind of charmed by his enthusiasm and drive (with a few exceptions), but the scene makes us painfully aware of the immaturity of his infatuation with Miss Cross and the unpleasant side of his personality and some of the actions he takes. We watch the "A Quick One While He's Away"/revenge sequence and laugh at Max cutting Blume's brakes, but the accomplishment of the exchange between Max Cross is not only to kind of illuminate that some of the things Max has done are kind of inappropriate and transgressive, but that the movie is aware of the fact that the actions were inappropriate. This makes some of the outlandish aspects of the movie more acceptable, since it defines this as a world where actions have consequences, where people can be selfish and hurt other people, where everything doesn't turn out alright in the end. It also makes Max's coming of age more poignant.

This kind of turned into more of a rambling note about one of the reasons that I love Rushmore than anything about Juno, but returning to that film, I don't get that vibe at all, that it will have anything resembling the Rushmore scene. I mean, look at the part from the trailer with her parents talking about the whole deal. Maybe I'm taking it way too literally and they're joking around, but the father says that he would rather have his daughter get busted for a DWI or get into hard drugs than get pregnant. What believable parents in any movie universe ever would rather have their child either A. break the law and endanger lives by driving while under the influence of alcohol or B. develop a serious addiction to drugs? Especially when she has made the reasonably mature decision to give the child up for adoption, and has already found someone to give the child to? If this is a movie where serious issues are going to be addressed with nothing more than eccentric, jokey dialogue, then its effectiveness will be limited. I'm not saying the movie should be some sort of PSA about the consequences of unprotected sex or teen pregnancy, but if Juno herself doesn't seem to be all that bothered by the human being inside of her, how can I be bothered to care about what happens to her, or any of the characters? As justleblanc said, Juno the character (and perhaps the movie) seems to be "subversive cute", and nothing more.

Noir of the Night wrote:The first part of it works, I guess, but would any 16-year-old, hipster or not, really go into the heartburn thing? It feels more like a screenwriter's construct than anything authentic. I get the feeling that I won't get much out of this film if the main character is going to quip her way through her life crises.

Uh-oh, it's a Gilmour Girl!! Run!!!!!!

International Trailer.

Noir of the Night wrote:However, I don't get the sense that this character is going to have any significant flaws

You mean aside from having unprotected sex and getting pregnant right?

Antoine Doinel wrote:

Noir of the Night wrote:However, I don't get the sense that this character is going to have any significant flaws

You mean aside from having unprotected sex and getting pregnant right?

Not a flaw -- only a quirk.

{ducks}

Antoine Doinel wrote:International Trailer.

Noir of the Night wrote:However, I don't get the sense that this character is going to have any significant flaws

You mean aside from having unprotected sex and getting pregnant right?

From what I can tell, the reaction of her parents doesn't really go anywhere beyond:

Juno's Parents: (deadpan, bemused) So you had unprotected sex and then became pregnant. Oh my!

And from what I can tell the character pretty quickly settles on the adoption route and picks the parents, and then decides to be deadpan and smartass about the child growing inside of her, so I kind of doubt the movie will give her recklesness re: unprotected sex that much weight.

I mean, if you look at it, giving up a child for adoption is kind of the most inoffensive, vanilla way the movie could have possibly dealt with it: Juno doesn't have her future irreversibly changed by an unwanted child, an adoptive family gets to show the child love and get a kid of their own, everybody wins (obviously things won't be so simple in the movie, but still). I don't usually like Lisa Schwarzbaum, but this part of her review of Juno stood out to me: "uno is fortunate to have a supportive and loving father (J.K. Simmons) and stepmother (Allison Janney), a true-blue best friend (Olivia Thirlby), access to a safe and legal abortion, and the right to choose whether to continue or terminate her pregnancy, with Bleeker's unwavering support. She chooses to continue, and to give the baby up for adoption. Juno would have been a very different movie had the young woman named for the queen of Roman gods chosen termination and brought her admirable young female clarity to that less gentle, more divisive decision — maybe truer, certainly not so funny." The kind of movie where a character like Juno actually seriously considers having an abortion and has to actually make a tough decision is more the kind of movie I might be interesting in seeing.

I'm not sure what's worse: judging a movie without seeing it or criticizing it for what it isn't.

Noir of the Night is completely right. I may see this as a big fan of Arrested Development but seriously, who talks like this? Independent film has always represented viewpoints that are different but there's a good chance this is just very standard, bland filmmaking. I hate when modern American films try to sugarcoat characters with emotional issues. Lars and the Real Girl is a perfect example of this. It's someone who is "different" but made cuteenough to still be endearing to a general audience. Compare that to the films of someone like Tsai Ming-Liang. The characters in his films almost always have problems but he never makes it seem quirky or whatever and at the same time, his films are still very funny.

Yeah, I agree that I was being a little unfair there, but I'd like to reiterate that I am not trying to criticize the movie. I'm just rambling about the trailer. That probably sounds like an excuse, but I think I have been fairly clear in saying that none of this is intended to reflect on the movie itself, just on the impressions the trailer and clips gave me. I do intend to see it, and I will have an open mind, and if the movie is good, I'll acknowledge that. But I mean, come on, unless several of the specific instances I have cited are completely absent from the film, I think they make it pretty clear that the whole unprotected sex thing is not going to be a huge issue. And I am absolutely not criticizing Juno for what it isn't. It is what it is, and that's absolutely lovely. I am just saying, as a filmgoer, the idea that Schwarzbaum suggested would probably interest me more. Is there anything wrong with saying that one idea in a movie would interest me more than another? No. But Juno isn't that, and that's fine, I'm not going to knock the movie for that or criticize it, any opinions I have will be based on what the movie is, not what it isn't.

Noir of the Night wrote:The kind of movie where a character like Juno actually seriously considers having an abortion and has to actually make a tough decision is more the kind of movie I might be interesting in seeing.

As it plays in the film, the decision, when she makes it, is a lot less seriously considered than all that.

Eric wrote:As it plays in the film, the decision, when she makes it, is a lot less seriously considered than all that.

I was very grateful for that. I certainly didn't want the film to turn in to "a very special Blossom," and for me, it avoided those moments at all turns. There are a couple of cutesy affectations like the Tic-Tacs and the track team that I could have done without, but I thought the film added up to much more than the sum of its parts. Ellen Page's utterly endearing performance makes up for the occasional "quirkiness."

Seeing this on Tuesday.

This sounds as if it was written in response to this thread.

Andre Jurieu wrote:This sounds as if it was written in response to this thread.

That's the best assessment of the film that I've read.

(And by "best," I mean "most like my own.")

This, as well, seems tailored for this thread. I haven't seen the film yet, but this review seems accurate of what I think it will be, and of the whole Sundance/quirk phenomenon.

As an antidote to Juno, I would call people's attention to Ozu's film dealing with an unplanned pregnancy -- Tokyo Twilight -- in which no pat answers are to be found.

(above link goes to comments and pictures)

chaddoli wrote:This, as well, seems tailored for this thread. I haven't seen the film yet, but this review seems accurate of what I think it will be, and of the whole Sundance/quirk phenomenon.

Haha, great read. Some highlights:

In the movies, contemporary quirk has become less about opposing the mainstream but being accepted by it. The quirk-mongers of Indiewood, the worst offenders of them all, have drained the words “eccentricâ€

A crowd-pleaser for people who like to think they're above crowd-pleasers but are actually not, it's going to be huge.

This pretty much confirms what I think is the mindset of most people eager to turn their noses at Juno - people don't want to be associated with something that might be popular. This quote is pretty much a lot of BS. Given the marketing campaign and huge press this film is getting I don't think anyone involved or anyone going to see the film is under any illusion that this isn't a mainstream picture. Moreover, what's wrong with a crowd-pleaser? If done well, they can be some of the best movie going experiences out there.

Antoine Doinel wrote:Moreover, what's wrong with a crowd-pleaser? If done well, they can be some of the best movie going experiences out there.

It depends whether a film maker can manage to make a film that is honest yet still pleases people -- or whether (in the end) they simply pander to the audience to help ensure approval.

Not having seen Juno, I won't attempt to put it in either category yet. (But nothing I've heard makes me think that I especially need to see this).

Random fact -- a Korean film about a pregnant (15 year old -- or so) teenager from a couple of years aback was named "Jenny and Juno".

Antoine Doinel wrote:

A crowd-pleaser for people who like to think they're above crowd-pleasers but are actually not, it's going to be huge.

This pretty much confirms what I think is the mindset of most people eager to turn their noses at Juno - people don't want to be associated with something that might be popular. This quote is pretty much a lot of BS.

Having seen the film, I can assure you that the quote in this context is most certainly not BS. It's not that the reviewer doesn't want to be associated with something that might be popular. It's that the reviewer senses quite correctly the entire film has been constructed with the SOLE intention of being popular. The whole write-up pretty much nails the cynicism and transparency of Reitman and especially Cody's work.

Though the reviewer comes off as incredibly smug (the critique of the use of the word "morose" was ridiculous) and I guess I'll have to wait and see if Juno tries too hard. But having greatly enjoyed Little Miss Sunshine - yes, I said it - and being a big Cera, Bateman et all fan, I'm ready to see what they do in a screwball pregnancy comedy.

I'm getting really tired of reviewers constantly mentioning their appreciation of Arrested Development as if it were some unique badge-of-honour that automatically makes them far more discerning than other reviewers. It's as if they believe that their admiration for that failed sitcom gives them some sort of special ability to spot counterfeit quirkiness, since Arrested Development was apparently too intelligent and peculiar for the masses to properly comprehend and embrace. I wish these people would do us all a favor and stop trying so hard to prove that they are so astute via shorthand name-dropping. It really makes me want to light myself on fire.

I agree. Here in Canada, the CBC has picked up the show and is running it in daily syndication even though according to critics, the masses still don't "get it".