And Julia Roberts keeps finding ways to force herself into my heart.

 

Now I'm not one of these people that have always worshiped at the alter of Julia. I wasn't a big fan of either Mystic Pizza or Pretty Woman (yes, I'm old enough to remember when those were released and in theaters). I liked her in Steel Magnolias, where she played asupporting role. After Pretty Woman she became a bonafide leading lady, but thinking back through her career, she hasn't been able to carry that many movies. Movies like Dying Young, Sleeping With the Enemy and Mary Reilly served as illustrations.

 

But all along, it was impossible not to at least give her a chance. She's humble and unassuming and gives you no reason to write her off. This is the reason why I'll go see the Pelican Briefs and Conspiracy Theorys and The Mexicans: a mixed bag. Within that mixed bag you'll get a Erin Brockovich or a Mona Lisa Smile.

 

Yes, I liked this movie.

 

In Smile, Roberts is not remarkable, but she is charming. She's extremely charming, a requirement for this fish out of water role where you need to empathize with her. Fail to do so and you will probably spend the span of the flick questioning the premise instead of worrying about the argument. She plays a California bohemian who accepts a position as a art-history teacher at Wellesley, portrayed as a collegiate factory of female conservatism and meekness, Roberts needs to put the questions in the audience's mind without verbalizing them: How does Wellsley's vision of femininity fit into her views? Into 1950s culture? Into the idea of being a woman?

 

With that as the premise, it would be easy for the movie to become a preachy female liberation piece. Decent directing and a well thought out storyline prevent this, as the emsemble of Julia Stiles, Kirstin Dunst, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Ginnifer Goodwin, all senior students under the institution's overt pressure to conform to the idea of the 1950s female housewife (despite their education), provide the backbone to the movie. They are the choices. They are the hows and the whys and the whens, and despite the Oscar-winning star power, they are the movie.

 

There is the temptation to compare this movie to Dead Poets Society. The comparison, which I've read in multiple places, is easy to make: Liberal teacher comes to a prestigious institution, shakes up the ranks and gives students a new perspective on life. That synopsis is true (though, trite) but an over simplification of both Dead Poets Society and Mona Lisa Smile. They accomplish slightly different objectives in notably different ways. Mona Lisa Smile is a lot more subtle (which is neither better nor worse).

 

And Julia Roberts is a lot more attractive than Robin Williams (though the ladies may prefer Ethan Hawke).

 

I'd recommend this movie to everybody expect those who like only epics, action flicks and some comedies. You don't need to like romantic comedies (Roberts's generalized modus operandi) to like this Julia movie.

 

You just have to like movies.

 

 

Mona Lisa Smile was released in the US on December 19.

Send me a message about what you've read. I'm trying to start a discussion (because I like movies) as well as improve my writing skills.

Robin Williams is a fox.

 

Richard I like your writing style, keep up the good work.

 

As for the movie I haven't seen it.

I want to see this movie.

I hope it's good.

Robin Williams is a fox.

 

Richard I like your writing style, keep up the good work.

 

As for the movie I haven't seen it.

 

One year I volunteered in the administration of a triatholon to raise money for people with disabilities. One part of the event allowed three people to team up to different parts of the course. Robin Williams did the bike part with a friend of his doing the run. The person doing the swim was a young man (14-16 years old) who had prosthetics for legs. There was some press there, but they weren't there to cover Robin Williams and he seemed to be making an effort not to be noticed by them. He was buys with his teammates, though those people who did notice him weren't turned away when they went to talk to him.

 

I didn't go talk to him. I had other things to do, and I didn't have anything to say to him which was necessary. But I like to tell this story when possible so, when people see Robin Williams, they'll see more than just an actor/comedian.

 

Oh ... he has more hair on his body than anybody I've ever seen. You might want to reconsider Ethan Hawke.

yes he is one hairy mofo

 

i am always so pleased with celebrities that do charity, and try to do it somewhat anonymously.

mona lisa smile- saw it today. it was a well done movie with a great cast.

i'm into modern art so i found it interesting to see how its early appearances were received. i also thought the movie was interesting as a young women who attends a college not too far from wellesley. thankfully things have progressed!

i'm a big fan of julia stiles, i think she is a fantastic actress. kirsten dunst also did a good job in her role of mega-bitch. maggie glynehall (sp?) was terrific, as was the girl who played connie (not sure of her name).

all in all it was a good movie. i'd say 3 out of 4 stars, it was very enjoyable, but not something you necessarily need to rush to the theatre to see.

I havent seen it yet... :dozey: Because it will be released here(Brazil)only on jan/2.But i really want to see this movie!I read Hillary's book(Living History) and she studied at Wellesy...did you know that?

Warning: Mild spoilers (won't ruin movie)

 

I agree that Maggie Gyllenhaal and Ginnifer Goodwin (Connie) were both really good. Gyllenhall I thought was particularly noteworthy. I like Stiles's performance though the affect she put in her speach, though well intended, didn't quite work for me. It ended up being somewhat distracting and I think it would have been better if they had not tried it.

 

As for Dunst, I have to say I didn't like her performance. Don't take my word for it, because I can't give you specific examples of what I didn't like about her performance (so the faults I'm about to detail in the character's portrayal might be better explained away to directing or editing).

 

Dunst's character is supposed to provide the most conservative view of the four girls: a staunch, if ignorant, defense of the view of femininity projected upon her by her mother. The mother's role shouls illustrate a certain deterministic fate to what happens with Dunst's character as the movie goes on. Between the adminitions on her choices to the role she has in the execution of the marriage, the mother creates a life for her daughter that's nothing more to a piece of driftwood.

 

I will admit that this comes together at one moment: When Dunst's character breaks down and projects her anger onto Gyllenhaal you see all of the self-loathing and disgust at what her life has becoming (or what she has allowed it to become). But the moments leading up to and following this do not add up, to me. You don't get the a glipse that, through the earlier parts of the movie, her hatred could be attributed to this self-loathing, and because of this the reversal following the break down (when she ends up living in New York with the Gyllenhall character) doesn't seem genuine.

 

However, after tying this up, I think I could be very wrong: Dunst's performance might have been fine and the story might have worked. I think my argument is weak ...

 

... but I still believe it (I just don't expect others to take my word for it).

 

I'm glad you liked the movie, though. I was upset when I heard somebody on MTV describe it as a chick-flick. This is not a chick-flick.

 

mona lisa smile- saw it today. it was a well done movie with a great cast.

i'm into modern art so i found it interesting to see how its early appearances were received. i also thought the movie was interesting as a young women who attends a college not too far from wellesley. thankfully things have progressed!

i'm a big fan of julia stiles, i think she is a fantastic actress. kirsten dunst also did a good job in her role of mega-bitch. maggie glynehall (sp?) was terrific, as was the girl who played connie (not sure of her name).

all in all it was a good movie. i'd say 3 out of 4 stars, it was very enjoyable, but not something you necessarily need to rush to the theatre to see.

I havent seen it yet... :dozey: Because it will be released here(Brazil)only on jan/2.But i really want to see this movie!I read Hillary's book(Living History) and she studied at Wellesy...did you know that?

 

Yep, knew that, but I was a Political Science student so facts like that are a little more interesting to me.

 

How was the book?

this movie looks too "lets all sit our pms selves around and talk about how boys damage our lives until the making up after the fight". yea too much girly talky movie for me. im into scary gore.HAHA!!

this movie looks too "lets all sit our pms selves around and talk about how boys damage our lives until the making up after the fight". yea too much girly talky movie for me. im into scary gore.HAHA!!

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

To the movie's credit, it says nothing about the male influence on these expectations (though a detailed discussion will obviously lead to that).

 

There are three notable male characters in the movie: an philandering Italian teacher (Dominic West), Joan's (Stiles) husband-to-be (Topher Grace), and Catherine's (Roberts) pre-Massachusetts love interest (Jon Slattery). All of these characters are very open to women's roles and project no pressure onto their companions to conform.

 

The pressure is applied most directly by the women, be them the divorcee Watson's living with, the college president or Dunst's character. The movie seems to ask women to think of themselves in terms of themselves, not definings themselves by men.

quote

 

I havent seen it yet... :dozey: Because it will be released here(Brazil)only on jan/2.But i really want to see this movie!I read Hillary's book(Living History) and she studied at Wellesy...did you know that?

 

Me too :lol:

So soon I see, Julia R. is a great actress!!

I love Erin Brocovitch!! :)

 

Yep, knew that, but I was a Political Science student so facts like that are a little more interesting to me.

 

How was the book?

 

 

I love politics!i hope im going to work as a diplomat !So...these kind of facts are interesting to me too.And the book is great if you like politics you must buy it!It can be a little boring to people that dont like political issues because she write a lot about whitewater scandal,the impeachment and human rights (specially women rights which reminds the film...)people that just what to know about the Monica Lewinsky scandal buying this book will loose time and money because she only mention about her on a short chapter(it has 38 chapters)

i saw this movie last night and it was alright. i liked the movie until it got to a certain point where i felt like it was trying to hard to prove their point, whatever it was. films are best when it appears to be effortless (if that is possible) and i didn't feel that in this film. i felt like this was trying to be a popular ($$$wise) movie with a relatively famous cast.

 

:/

^^ I can see that. I disagree somewhat, but I can see that, and it seems reasonable. The cast is pretty star struck, but I think the movie would have been good with just good acting performances (not necessarily names). But when you say "to a certain point," I can almost imagine that point in my head (looking back), so I can't fault you too much.

 

Anybody else see it?

i agree, the film would have been better with lesser known actors that put on excellent performances. it was towards the end of the film where i was hit with "this is kinda stupid".

 

anyone notice tori amos performing in the wedding??

I noticed that. She didn't look good :P

she sounded good :P :P

True dat. Word!

I havent seen it yet... :dozey: Because it will be released here(Brazil)only on jan/2.But i really want to see this movie!I read Hillary's book(Living History) and she studied at Wellesy...did you know that?

 

Yep, knew that, but I was a Political Science student so facts like that are a little more interesting to me.

 

How was the book?

 

computer programmer, poli sci ?

 

:huh:

^Yep. Life is great that way.

Lucky.

Ah, no luck to it.

well. smarts then.

just hard work. i'm not a smart man, but if my intelligence lies anywhere it's in my willingness to devote time.