"(500) Days of Summer"

[Stewball]

Is there a reason the male protagonist of this film is six years my elder and yet looks like a 12 year old nancy boy?

Nawwwwwwww. Maybe you're just jealous of his face? But you're arguing against a ghost. You must see it. Be still and know.

[theficionado]

Things that suck about this movie:

How it holds the audience's hands through its twisted chronology via the little day odometer
The irony offered by Tom's job and the easy potshots and moral grandstanding it affords
The trite narration
The precious advice-dispensing preteen sister, easily the most annoying part of the whole movie
The comic relief friends who only exist to complement and foil the main character
The attempts to ingratiate the "indie" audience with references to The Smith, The Pixies, etc.
The terrible punchline ending
The generally terrible attempts at whimsy

Despite that, I didn't dislike the movie. When it just concentrated on the relationship, it was actually kind of funny and sincere. What I liked most was that it ends up being less about love and more about a very particular male desperation and forceful obliviousness. (see: The Graduate scene.) But, really, masterpiece? No way in hell.

And though it tries to subvert the typical rom-com structure, it ends up a slave to it nonetheless.

[theficionado]

Haha, I just read stain's review:

I walked out right after the part where Whatisface and Summer try something in the shower that they just saw in the X-rated movie; you never want to try to fuck anyone in the shower, no matter how cute they are, as the water tends to wash away all lubricants, natural and otherwise. That's just beginning to describe how dumb this movie really is

[Stewball]

No it doesn't.

[Filligan]

Best movie I've seen this year. That might change, it might not. It's the best romantic comedy I've seen in a long time. The techniques a film take doesn't always have to hurt it, as some people think for some dumbfounding reason. I mean, the movie is called (500) Days of Summer, that's... the little quirk it took to take you through the narrative as we switch between days, weeks, months. Why is this something bad? It's not.

Anyway, it's the quirky indie comedy of the year. We should expect quirks. We should expect hipster stuff. We should expect such a soundtrack and such editing techniques. We've been over this and over this: Little Miss Sunshine, Juno, Happy-Go-Lucky. Those who dislike these kinds of films, can't manage to get past these things, probably shouldn't see them anyway. (500) Days is even better than those on the list, however, by a considerable margin, which is why I love it so.

And Stain isn't very intelligent. But this isn't news.

[Stewball]

I gotta admit, when they first started flipping the day counter, I worried that they were going to loose me with all the jumping around. But it worked and even enhanced the experience. And I thought the narrator, though he didn't have that many lines, was critical.

[theficionado]

The techniques a film take doesn't always have to hurt it, as some people think for some dumbfounding reason. I mean, the movie is called (500) Days of Summer, that's... the little quirk it took to take you through the narrative as we switch between days, weeks, months. Why is this something bad? It's not.

No, what's bad is how the movie uses the little flipper to let me know when everything is, as if I couldn't figure out what's happening otherwise. That just shows an extreme lack of faith in the audience.

Anyway, it's the quirky indie comedy of the year. We should expect quirks. We should expect hipster stuff. We should expect such a soundtrack and such editing techniques. We've been over this and over this: Little Miss Sunshine, Juno, Happy-Go-Lucky.

1. I have no idea what Happy-Go-Lucky is doing in there. That movie, despite its warm idealism, still features a naturalism that is distinctly different from the stylized aesthetic of the other movies mentioned.

2. Quirky is meaningless as a descriptor of a style. What does it mean? Typically, those movies defined as quirky are marked by the use of irony or extreme understatement, an aesthetic that is flagrantly false and breaks the fourth wall, and/or a knowing use of pop culture references, usually tacky or somewhat esoteric. These traits in of themselves do not make a film worthy, by the way.

[mr rigard]

I just returned from seeing 500 Days. It is a very good movie, and I can see it yanking an oscar nomination or two. Specifically, Gordon-Levitt who captivated me as he conveyed spot-on a vast array of emotions. A+ to him for his performance.

Undoubtedly, it is among the best in the "romance" genre with the likes of When Harry Met Sally and The Notebook. However, if categorized in the "romantic comedy" category, it is only a "good" movie.

[Filligan]

The techniques a film take doesn't always have to hurt it, as some people think for some dumbfounding reason. I mean, the movie is called (500) Days of Summer, that's... the little quirk it took to take you through the narrative as we switch between days, weeks, months. Why is this something bad? It's not.

No, what's bad is how the movie uses the little flipper to let me know when everything is, as if I couldn't figure out what's happening otherwise. That just shows an extreme lack of faith in the audience.

But... that's the point of the movie. It's right there in the title. I don't think the writers were thinking "We better hold their hand as we skip through random days of the season!", they just thought it was a neat idea. Hence... it's right there in the title.

[tef]

Does it piss you off when journals have dates on them?