Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Misbehaviour (2020) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A film guide on how to sit on the fence.
It’s only 50 years ago, but the timeframe of Misbehaviour feels like a very different world. Although only 9 years old in 1970, I remember sitting around the tele with my family to enjoy the regular Eric and Julia Morley ‘cattle market’ of girls parading in national dress and swimsuits. We were not alone. At its peak in the 70’s over 18 million Britons watched the show (not surprising bearing in mind there were only three channels to choose from in 1970… no streaming… no video players… not even smartphones to distract you!)
The background.
“Misbehaviour” tells the story of this eventful 1970 Miss World competition. It was eventful for a number of reasons: the Women’s Lib movement was rising in popularity, and the event was disrupted a flour-bombing group of women in the audience; the compere Bob Hope did an appallingly misjudged and mysoginistic routine that died a death; and, after significant pressure against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the country surprised the world by sending two entrants to the show – one white (Miss South Africa) and one black (Miss Africa South).
The movie charts the events leading up to that night and some of the fallout that resulted from it.
A strong ensemble cast.
“Misbehaviour” has a great cast.
Leading the women are posh-girl Sally Alexander (Keira Knightley) and punk-girl Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley). I’m normally a big fan of both of these ladies. But here I never felt either of them connected particularly well with their characters. In particular, Buckley (although delivering as a similar maverick in “Wild Rose“) always felt a bit forced and out of place here.
On the event organisation side is Rhys Ifans, almost unrecognisable as Eric Morley, and Keeley Hawes as Julia Morley. Ifans gets the mannerisms of the impresario spot-on (as illustrated by some real-life footage shown at the end of the film). Also splendid is funny-man Miles Jupp as their “fixer” Clive.
Less successful for me was Greg Kinnear as Bob Hope. Hope clearly has such an unusual moon-shaped face that it’s difficult to find anyone to cast as a lookalike.
Just who is exploiting who here?
There’s no question in my mind that the event, in retrospect, is obscenely inappropriate – even though, bizarrely, it still runs to this day. But my biggest problem with the movie is that it never seems to pin its colours to any particular mast. It clearly illustrates the inappropriateness of Hope’s off-colour jokes and the instruction from host Michael Aspel (Charlie Anson), asking the swimsuit models to “show their rear view” to the audience, is gobsmackingly crass.
However, the script then takes a sympathetic view to the candidates from Grenada, South Africa, etc. who are clearly ‘using their bodies’ to get a leg-up to fame and fortune back in their home countries. (Final scenes showing the woman today, clearly affluent and happy, doesn’t help with that!)
As such, the movie sits magnificently on the fence and never reaches a ‘verdict’.
The racial sub-story.
Equally problematic is the really fascinating racial sub-story: this was an event, held in a UK that was racially far less tolerant than it is today, where no black person had EVER won. Indeed, a win was in most peoples’ eyes unthinkable. This was a time when “black lives didn’t matter”. Here we have Miss Grenada (an excellent Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and the utterly captivating Miss Africa South (a debut performance by Loreece Harrison) threatening to turn the tables . There was surely potential to get a lot more value out of this aspect of the story, but it is generally un-mined.
Perhaps a problem here is that there is so much story potential around this one historical event that there is just too much to fit comfortably into one screenplay. The writers Rebecca Frayn and Gaby Chiappe end up just giving a few bursts on the liquidizer and getting a slightly grey mush.
Nostalgia – it’s not what it used to be.
All this is not to say the movie was a write off. It’s a perfectly pleasant watch and for those (like me) of a certain age, the throwback fashions, vehicles and attitudes deliver a burst of nostalgia for the flawed but rose-coloured days of my first decade on the planet.
But it all feels like a bit of a missed opportunity to properly tackle either one of the two key issues highlighted in the script. As a female-led project (the director is Philippa Lowthorpe) I really wanted this to be good. But I’m afraid for me it’s all a bit “meh”.
If asked “would you like to watch that again?”… I would probably, politely, show my rear view and decline.
The background.
“Misbehaviour” tells the story of this eventful 1970 Miss World competition. It was eventful for a number of reasons: the Women’s Lib movement was rising in popularity, and the event was disrupted a flour-bombing group of women in the audience; the compere Bob Hope did an appallingly misjudged and mysoginistic routine that died a death; and, after significant pressure against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the country surprised the world by sending two entrants to the show – one white (Miss South Africa) and one black (Miss Africa South).
The movie charts the events leading up to that night and some of the fallout that resulted from it.
A strong ensemble cast.
“Misbehaviour” has a great cast.
Leading the women are posh-girl Sally Alexander (Keira Knightley) and punk-girl Jo Robinson (Jessie Buckley). I’m normally a big fan of both of these ladies. But here I never felt either of them connected particularly well with their characters. In particular, Buckley (although delivering as a similar maverick in “Wild Rose“) always felt a bit forced and out of place here.
On the event organisation side is Rhys Ifans, almost unrecognisable as Eric Morley, and Keeley Hawes as Julia Morley. Ifans gets the mannerisms of the impresario spot-on (as illustrated by some real-life footage shown at the end of the film). Also splendid is funny-man Miles Jupp as their “fixer” Clive.
Less successful for me was Greg Kinnear as Bob Hope. Hope clearly has such an unusual moon-shaped face that it’s difficult to find anyone to cast as a lookalike.
Just who is exploiting who here?
There’s no question in my mind that the event, in retrospect, is obscenely inappropriate – even though, bizarrely, it still runs to this day. But my biggest problem with the movie is that it never seems to pin its colours to any particular mast. It clearly illustrates the inappropriateness of Hope’s off-colour jokes and the instruction from host Michael Aspel (Charlie Anson), asking the swimsuit models to “show their rear view” to the audience, is gobsmackingly crass.
However, the script then takes a sympathetic view to the candidates from Grenada, South Africa, etc. who are clearly ‘using their bodies’ to get a leg-up to fame and fortune back in their home countries. (Final scenes showing the woman today, clearly affluent and happy, doesn’t help with that!)
As such, the movie sits magnificently on the fence and never reaches a ‘verdict’.
The racial sub-story.
Equally problematic is the really fascinating racial sub-story: this was an event, held in a UK that was racially far less tolerant than it is today, where no black person had EVER won. Indeed, a win was in most peoples’ eyes unthinkable. This was a time when “black lives didn’t matter”. Here we have Miss Grenada (an excellent Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and the utterly captivating Miss Africa South (a debut performance by Loreece Harrison) threatening to turn the tables . There was surely potential to get a lot more value out of this aspect of the story, but it is generally un-mined.
Perhaps a problem here is that there is so much story potential around this one historical event that there is just too much to fit comfortably into one screenplay. The writers Rebecca Frayn and Gaby Chiappe end up just giving a few bursts on the liquidizer and getting a slightly grey mush.
Nostalgia – it’s not what it used to be.
All this is not to say the movie was a write off. It’s a perfectly pleasant watch and for those (like me) of a certain age, the throwback fashions, vehicles and attitudes deliver a burst of nostalgia for the flawed but rose-coloured days of my first decade on the planet.
But it all feels like a bit of a missed opportunity to properly tackle either one of the two key issues highlighted in the script. As a female-led project (the director is Philippa Lowthorpe) I really wanted this to be good. But I’m afraid for me it’s all a bit “meh”.
If asked “would you like to watch that again?”… I would probably, politely, show my rear view and decline.
Awkward, failed attempt at satire?
After college, Elinor moves to New York with her journalism degree and dreams of writing pieces that mean something. She sees a future with her boyfriend, Mike, also a journalist. Instead, Elinor lives in a cramped apartment with no kitchen, sleeps on a foam pad, and nannies to two slightly whiny and obsessive children. She thinks her future is looking up when she's offered a position at Journalism.ly, a digital brand a la BuzzFeed. But soon Elinor learns that her sole function there is to produce pieces that go "viral" and then she and Mike break up, pushing her into a deeper depression. Is it even possible to have the creative and romantic life she dreamed of, Elinor wonders?
I won't lie; this was a strange book. Even the narration style is odd. While it's told mostly from Elinor's point of view, we get this peculiar device thrown in at times (e.g., "the reader should know"). You get used to it eventually, but still.
In fact, the whole novel can be very awkward at times and after a while, I lost the thread on whether it was because the book was well-done (she's so well-written!) or just awkward and painful. A lot of the book features much melodrama between the characters, most of whom always seemed to be having bad days. Really, was life so terrible? There is much angst, a lot of social media usage, lots of happy hours and supposed networking, and not a lot of people to care about.
For indeed, a lot of the characters are not likable, and I found myself vacillating in my feelings for Elinor. I didn't grow up in the social media world, like she, but am immersed in it enough now that I could empathize with her--to a point. At some stages, the novel really captured some painful situations. There were some funny points, and places where Elinor could be helpless yet sympathetic. At other points, Elinor was just hapless and unable to take charge of her life in any capacity and filled me with abject terror for the future of the nation.
I was honestly baffled at times on whether the book was satiric, or a commentary on social media and journalism, or taking itself too seriously. Elinor winds up working for Journalism.ly, which is said to be similar to BuzzFeed (and many other sites), and she's told to make things go viral, which, funnily enough, she has a bit of a knack for, despite her own inability to make friends or succeed in social situations (or life, in general). Whether all of this is ironic or not, I'll never quite know.
So, in the end, I'm at a loss with this one. I really don't know how I feel. Satire? A look at a generation? A bunch of hapless unlikable people prattling on? All three combined? I can say that this was a fast read--the author drew me in, as I read it in about a day. I was left with a weird feeling when I finished. I can't say I really recommend it, but it was an interesting read at times.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for an unbiased review; more at https://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
I won't lie; this was a strange book. Even the narration style is odd. While it's told mostly from Elinor's point of view, we get this peculiar device thrown in at times (e.g., "the reader should know"). You get used to it eventually, but still.
In fact, the whole novel can be very awkward at times and after a while, I lost the thread on whether it was because the book was well-done (she's so well-written!) or just awkward and painful. A lot of the book features much melodrama between the characters, most of whom always seemed to be having bad days. Really, was life so terrible? There is much angst, a lot of social media usage, lots of happy hours and supposed networking, and not a lot of people to care about.
For indeed, a lot of the characters are not likable, and I found myself vacillating in my feelings for Elinor. I didn't grow up in the social media world, like she, but am immersed in it enough now that I could empathize with her--to a point. At some stages, the novel really captured some painful situations. There were some funny points, and places where Elinor could be helpless yet sympathetic. At other points, Elinor was just hapless and unable to take charge of her life in any capacity and filled me with abject terror for the future of the nation.
I was honestly baffled at times on whether the book was satiric, or a commentary on social media and journalism, or taking itself too seriously. Elinor winds up working for Journalism.ly, which is said to be similar to BuzzFeed (and many other sites), and she's told to make things go viral, which, funnily enough, she has a bit of a knack for, despite her own inability to make friends or succeed in social situations (or life, in general). Whether all of this is ironic or not, I'll never quite know.
So, in the end, I'm at a loss with this one. I really don't know how I feel. Satire? A look at a generation? A bunch of hapless unlikable people prattling on? All three combined? I can say that this was a fast read--the author drew me in, as I read it in about a day. I was left with a weird feeling when I finished. I can't say I really recommend it, but it was an interesting read at times.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Edelweiss in return for an unbiased review; more at https://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/.
Extreme Agenda
Business and Productivity
App
NEW VERSION 5.0 • SEPTEMBER 2016! Premium class organization. Extreme Agenda is your planner...
Taryn K (441 KP) rated Food Wars!: Shokugeki no Soma in Books
Oct 18, 2017
The characters, which are well-developed, for the most part. (1 more)
The dishes, which I was surprised to learn have actually been tested before being put into the books.
Food Wars!: Shokugeki no Soma (the series)
I have been reading Food Wars since volume 1 came out and now that book 20 has recently been released in the United States, I still enjoy this rather unique food-based manga.
The hero, Yukihira Soma, has been raised as the only child of a single father who runs a diner called Yukihira. One day, his father tells Soma that he has enrolled him in a culinary school and that he will be off helping friends for a while. Soma doesn't think much of this idea, but goes to take the test for Totsuki Teahouse Culinary Academy and settles into Polaris Dormitory, and so the story begins.
Soma has quirks, and lots of them. You know he's getting serious when he whips his headband off his wrist and dons it and his apron (which I've not figured out yet where he keeps that). He has no end of confidence, and often says the first thing that comes to his mind, which gets him in trouble a lot of the time. He's determined to be the top student at the academy so that he can beat his dad eventually in a food competition, of which he's lost several during his childhood. Despite this, he is eager to learn new things and never gives up. He is loyal to his friends and has a strong sense of justice.
Totsuki Teahouse Culinary Academy isn't exactly the most normal school anyway. It is a fact that over 90% or more of the students either get expelled, fail out, or drop out, and the idea behind the academy is that most of the students are there merely to "polish" the students who make it through the final year of high school. It is run not only by Dean Nakiri, but by the Council of Ten, who are the top ten students at the school. Disputes between the students are settled by Shokugeki, which have very strict rules.
I think my favorite story arc is the one with the Fall Classic (books 6-13), where 100 selected first year high school students compete to see who is the best. The winners usually go on to become part of the Council of Ten. Many things happen in this arc, from Soma and Megumi (a girl from Polaris, who learns a lot about cooking and confidence from Soma) learning about curry and spices, to Soma's dad coming for a visit, to a copycat chef who wins other students' favorite cutlery from them in Shokugeki, to the surprise finish of the Classic under the light of the full moon.
I would definitely recommend this manga series if you enjoyed other food series such as Yakitate!! Japan. It's a lot of fun and drama all wrapped up in a tasty bow. The manga series is still on-going, with an anime which has just entered its third season.
The hero, Yukihira Soma, has been raised as the only child of a single father who runs a diner called Yukihira. One day, his father tells Soma that he has enrolled him in a culinary school and that he will be off helping friends for a while. Soma doesn't think much of this idea, but goes to take the test for Totsuki Teahouse Culinary Academy and settles into Polaris Dormitory, and so the story begins.
Soma has quirks, and lots of them. You know he's getting serious when he whips his headband off his wrist and dons it and his apron (which I've not figured out yet where he keeps that). He has no end of confidence, and often says the first thing that comes to his mind, which gets him in trouble a lot of the time. He's determined to be the top student at the academy so that he can beat his dad eventually in a food competition, of which he's lost several during his childhood. Despite this, he is eager to learn new things and never gives up. He is loyal to his friends and has a strong sense of justice.
Totsuki Teahouse Culinary Academy isn't exactly the most normal school anyway. It is a fact that over 90% or more of the students either get expelled, fail out, or drop out, and the idea behind the academy is that most of the students are there merely to "polish" the students who make it through the final year of high school. It is run not only by Dean Nakiri, but by the Council of Ten, who are the top ten students at the school. Disputes between the students are settled by Shokugeki, which have very strict rules.
I think my favorite story arc is the one with the Fall Classic (books 6-13), where 100 selected first year high school students compete to see who is the best. The winners usually go on to become part of the Council of Ten. Many things happen in this arc, from Soma and Megumi (a girl from Polaris, who learns a lot about cooking and confidence from Soma) learning about curry and spices, to Soma's dad coming for a visit, to a copycat chef who wins other students' favorite cutlery from them in Shokugeki, to the surprise finish of the Classic under the light of the full moon.
I would definitely recommend this manga series if you enjoyed other food series such as Yakitate!! Japan. It's a lot of fun and drama all wrapped up in a tasty bow. The manga series is still on-going, with an anime which has just entered its third season.
Jamie (131 KP) rated Not a Sound in Books
Aug 15, 2017
Engaging story (2 more)
Great cast of characters, a resilient heroine
Handles the subject of disability with delicacy and respect
A compelling thriller about a deaf woman that finds herself entangled in a murder investigation
The story follows Amelia, a former ER nurse left deaf after a horrible accident that is struggling to get her life back together. I greatly appreciated how delicately the subjects of disability, depression, and alcoholism are handled in this book. Amelia is both a sympathetic character and an admirable one, actively learning how to carry on and create a new life for herself after the loss of her hearing. She’s strong-willed, persistent, and resourceful. Her deafness is a part of who she is, but she is not defined by it. This book was incredibly informative both about the impact that deafness can have on a person’s every day functionality, but also the multitude of tools and resources available to help. I learned quite a lot about the services available for the hearing impaired and thought it was great how well researched the topic is. It wasn’t until after I finished reading that I learned that the author herself is hearing impaired and draws from her own experiences to depict Amelia’s journey toward recovery.
Having read a few of Gudenkauf’s books I can’t help but notice a pattern in her stories that bothers me. In every one of her books that I’ve read the main character always has some connection to law enforcement that gets her “in” an investigation, even though she really shouldn’t see or know any of this information legally. Even worse, the main character always ends up interfering in an investigation by giving the police false leads. I don’t mind following an amateur sleuth that makes mistakes in their investigation it starts to feel repetitive with these characters suspecting everyone of everything.
It’s a very obvious attempt at adding some red herrings to the story to keep the mystery going but it becomes very noticeable once you’re acquainted with the author’s writing style. It is because of this that the story becomes a little predictable and the culprit can be guessed almost as soon as they are introduced. It seems that Gudenkauf may have noticed this, at least, as the character is reprimanded for her meddling and I appreciated this.
Despite this, however, the story kept me interested in finding out the how and they why rather than the who. Gudenkauf has a way of immersing the reader into the story and the characters and it is something that I admire about her work. Her skill with pacing is perfect despite the sometimes overwhelming issues with dangerous interference that is present in many of her books. It is because of these two factors that make her books so hit or miss with me.
This book was a definite hit and I’m so glad that I took a chance on it. It’s rare to find a main character that is disabled in some way and so I was happy that I found this book. I love the commentary that this book has about the importance of trust and empathy in the health industry, a topic that I wish was addressed more often. Even with the mild plot issues it’s worthwhile read for the intense mystery and wonderful cast of characters, especially Amelia and Stitch.
Having read a few of Gudenkauf’s books I can’t help but notice a pattern in her stories that bothers me. In every one of her books that I’ve read the main character always has some connection to law enforcement that gets her “in” an investigation, even though she really shouldn’t see or know any of this information legally. Even worse, the main character always ends up interfering in an investigation by giving the police false leads. I don’t mind following an amateur sleuth that makes mistakes in their investigation it starts to feel repetitive with these characters suspecting everyone of everything.
It’s a very obvious attempt at adding some red herrings to the story to keep the mystery going but it becomes very noticeable once you’re acquainted with the author’s writing style. It is because of this that the story becomes a little predictable and the culprit can be guessed almost as soon as they are introduced. It seems that Gudenkauf may have noticed this, at least, as the character is reprimanded for her meddling and I appreciated this.
Despite this, however, the story kept me interested in finding out the how and they why rather than the who. Gudenkauf has a way of immersing the reader into the story and the characters and it is something that I admire about her work. Her skill with pacing is perfect despite the sometimes overwhelming issues with dangerous interference that is present in many of her books. It is because of these two factors that make her books so hit or miss with me.
This book was a definite hit and I’m so glad that I took a chance on it. It’s rare to find a main character that is disabled in some way and so I was happy that I found this book. I love the commentary that this book has about the importance of trust and empathy in the health industry, a topic that I wish was addressed more often. Even with the mild plot issues it’s worthwhile read for the intense mystery and wonderful cast of characters, especially Amelia and Stitch.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated 16 Blocks (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
A burnt out cop with a bad limp and a taste for the bottle has just finished his shift and is looking forward to heading home for some rest. Sadly for Detective Jack Mosley (Bruce Willis), his day is about to get much longer than he expected.
On his way out of the precinct, his Lieutenant tasks him to escort a prisoner named Eddie Bunker (Mos Def), 16 blocks in 90 minutes so he can testify before a jury. Since the jury will disband in 90 minutes, it is vital that Eddie appear before them or else months of work in a prime case will be lost.
Jack is less than thrilled to be stuck with Eddie as his high voice and rapid fire style of speech really annoy Jack, who decides to take a detour from the non stop rants of Eddie to purchase a bottle of alcohol so he can drown his sorrows.
No sooner does Jack complete his purchase at a favorite store than an attempt is made on Eddie by armed men forcing Jack and Eddie to flee on foot and take refuge in a local bar where they are soon met by detective Frank Nugent (David Morse), who said he was in the area and responded to Jack’s call for assistance.
Frank informs his former partner Jack that he is escorting a snitch who is about to give evidence that will implicate many cops who were simply doing business. Frank suggests that Jack head home and rest while he cleans up the problem by taking charge of Eddie.
When Jack learns that Frank and his associates intend to kill Eddie to keep him from testifying, Jack decides to defend Eddie and the two of them begin a deadly race against the clock as they attempt to not only get Eddie to the courthouse in time, but to simply stay alive against a cadre of corrupt cops.
Since he went up against fellow cops, Jack is reported as a rogue who turned on fellow officers, which leaves him with nowhere to turn and without backup as he attempt to stay one step ahead of the relentless Frank and his associates as they venture from one city block to another in order to stay alive. Along the way, the two men bond, and Jack begins to learn that what Eddie knows will get them all killed and that in a city the size of New York, there are precious few places to hide, when people are determined to find you.
The solid pacing of the film and the quality work by Morse, Willis, and Mos Def keeps 16 Blocks an entertaining and engaging film. The chemistry amongst the leads draws you in more than most typical action dramas do, as you find yourself caring about the two individuals and want them to succeed.
Director Richard Donner has dialed down his usual explosions but has not sacrificed the action as it is always appropriate to the story and never seems tacked on. The film does loose some steam towards the end but does ultimately arrive at a conclusion that makes the trip worthwhile.
The film does borrow in parts from the classic Clint Eastwood film “The Gauntlet”. Even down to the heroes taking refuge in a city bus and attempted to evade the police in the bus amidst an armada of armed officers who are looking to shoot first and ask questions later.
If you are a fan of Willis or Mos Def and like action dramas, then 16 Blocks is a trip well worth taking.
On his way out of the precinct, his Lieutenant tasks him to escort a prisoner named Eddie Bunker (Mos Def), 16 blocks in 90 minutes so he can testify before a jury. Since the jury will disband in 90 minutes, it is vital that Eddie appear before them or else months of work in a prime case will be lost.
Jack is less than thrilled to be stuck with Eddie as his high voice and rapid fire style of speech really annoy Jack, who decides to take a detour from the non stop rants of Eddie to purchase a bottle of alcohol so he can drown his sorrows.
No sooner does Jack complete his purchase at a favorite store than an attempt is made on Eddie by armed men forcing Jack and Eddie to flee on foot and take refuge in a local bar where they are soon met by detective Frank Nugent (David Morse), who said he was in the area and responded to Jack’s call for assistance.
Frank informs his former partner Jack that he is escorting a snitch who is about to give evidence that will implicate many cops who were simply doing business. Frank suggests that Jack head home and rest while he cleans up the problem by taking charge of Eddie.
When Jack learns that Frank and his associates intend to kill Eddie to keep him from testifying, Jack decides to defend Eddie and the two of them begin a deadly race against the clock as they attempt to not only get Eddie to the courthouse in time, but to simply stay alive against a cadre of corrupt cops.
Since he went up against fellow cops, Jack is reported as a rogue who turned on fellow officers, which leaves him with nowhere to turn and without backup as he attempt to stay one step ahead of the relentless Frank and his associates as they venture from one city block to another in order to stay alive. Along the way, the two men bond, and Jack begins to learn that what Eddie knows will get them all killed and that in a city the size of New York, there are precious few places to hide, when people are determined to find you.
The solid pacing of the film and the quality work by Morse, Willis, and Mos Def keeps 16 Blocks an entertaining and engaging film. The chemistry amongst the leads draws you in more than most typical action dramas do, as you find yourself caring about the two individuals and want them to succeed.
Director Richard Donner has dialed down his usual explosions but has not sacrificed the action as it is always appropriate to the story and never seems tacked on. The film does loose some steam towards the end but does ultimately arrive at a conclusion that makes the trip worthwhile.
The film does borrow in parts from the classic Clint Eastwood film “The Gauntlet”. Even down to the heroes taking refuge in a city bus and attempted to evade the police in the bus amidst an armada of armed officers who are looking to shoot first and ask questions later.
If you are a fan of Willis or Mos Def and like action dramas, then 16 Blocks is a trip well worth taking.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Mean Girls (2004) in Movies
Nov 22, 2020
Entertaining
Film #3 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Mean Girls
The third film on my 100 Movies Bucket List is Mean Girls, a film I’ve seen but never had any strong emotion for. Mean Girls stars Lindsay Lohan as Cady, who after living and being homeschooled in Africa for most of her life, must now enter the terrifying world of an American high school. Here she meets Janis (Lizzy Caplan) and Damian (Daniel Franzese) who clue her into high school hierarchy, including introducing her to the Plastics: Regina (Rachel McAdams), Karen (Amanda Seyfried) and Gretchen (Lacey Chabert).
Mean Girls is a teenage movie that is unlike many others – instead of being dumb and crude, it’s surprisingly smart and humorous. From the opening scenes, it’s obvious that this is intelligent. It’s full of subtle jokes and remarks and some absolutely superb one liners, and these are all down to Tina Fey who has written an excellent script. And in the process appears to have some of the best lines as teacher Mrs Norbury, but do you blame her? Mean Girls manages to portray the high school hierarchy and social interactions perfectly. Whilst is is obviously catering more to American high schoolers, I doubt there are many that would watch this and not see something that they personally experienced at high school. It’s almost poking fun at the high school experience but in such a smart and enjoyable way. There are moments and lines in this that are almost verging on inappropriate, and likely wouldn’t be acceptable in today’s society, but even though this was made in 2004 I don’t doubt that this impropriety is still reflective of modern day high schools.
The acting on offer here is superb. Lindsay Lohan is entirely believable as Cady and this is hugely important considering the message Mean Girls is portraying. This film is entirely about the realisation that you should be happy about you are, and that putting other people down will never achieve anything. Getting this message across is done very well, in a funny yet almost heartwarming manner although admittedly it is all rather obvious. Although at least this tries to avoid as many teenage film clichés as possible, which makes for a refreshing change.
My problem with Mean Girls is the whole bitchiness of it all that underpins the second act. I know “mean” girls were to be expected, but by the end I found myself getting very irritable with how horrible these girls were and the constant sniping at each other. This may stem from my own sometimes unpleasant experiences at high school, but teenage girls stabbing each other in the backs gets very old very quickly. Fortunately the ending does at least relieve some of the meanness and provide a surprisingly heartwarming and uplifting resolution, but I’m afraid some of the damage remains. And I must admit that seeing a smart girl play dumb and risk failing for a boy really makes my blood boil, and yes I do know it’s only a film.
Overall Mean Girls is a well done teenage film which stands out mostly because of its very smart script. It’s probably one of the best high school based films out there but it isn’t perfect, and I do question as to whether it deserves a spot on the bucket list when there are so many outstanding films that have missed out.
The third film on my 100 Movies Bucket List is Mean Girls, a film I’ve seen but never had any strong emotion for. Mean Girls stars Lindsay Lohan as Cady, who after living and being homeschooled in Africa for most of her life, must now enter the terrifying world of an American high school. Here she meets Janis (Lizzy Caplan) and Damian (Daniel Franzese) who clue her into high school hierarchy, including introducing her to the Plastics: Regina (Rachel McAdams), Karen (Amanda Seyfried) and Gretchen (Lacey Chabert).
Mean Girls is a teenage movie that is unlike many others – instead of being dumb and crude, it’s surprisingly smart and humorous. From the opening scenes, it’s obvious that this is intelligent. It’s full of subtle jokes and remarks and some absolutely superb one liners, and these are all down to Tina Fey who has written an excellent script. And in the process appears to have some of the best lines as teacher Mrs Norbury, but do you blame her? Mean Girls manages to portray the high school hierarchy and social interactions perfectly. Whilst is is obviously catering more to American high schoolers, I doubt there are many that would watch this and not see something that they personally experienced at high school. It’s almost poking fun at the high school experience but in such a smart and enjoyable way. There are moments and lines in this that are almost verging on inappropriate, and likely wouldn’t be acceptable in today’s society, but even though this was made in 2004 I don’t doubt that this impropriety is still reflective of modern day high schools.
The acting on offer here is superb. Lindsay Lohan is entirely believable as Cady and this is hugely important considering the message Mean Girls is portraying. This film is entirely about the realisation that you should be happy about you are, and that putting other people down will never achieve anything. Getting this message across is done very well, in a funny yet almost heartwarming manner although admittedly it is all rather obvious. Although at least this tries to avoid as many teenage film clichés as possible, which makes for a refreshing change.
My problem with Mean Girls is the whole bitchiness of it all that underpins the second act. I know “mean” girls were to be expected, but by the end I found myself getting very irritable with how horrible these girls were and the constant sniping at each other. This may stem from my own sometimes unpleasant experiences at high school, but teenage girls stabbing each other in the backs gets very old very quickly. Fortunately the ending does at least relieve some of the meanness and provide a surprisingly heartwarming and uplifting resolution, but I’m afraid some of the damage remains. And I must admit that seeing a smart girl play dumb and risk failing for a boy really makes my blood boil, and yes I do know it’s only a film.
Overall Mean Girls is a well done teenage film which stands out mostly because of its very smart script. It’s probably one of the best high school based films out there but it isn’t perfect, and I do question as to whether it deserves a spot on the bucket list when there are so many outstanding films that have missed out.
