I saw Ruby Sparks tonight, and I loved it. If you are at all interested in seeing it, I say DO IT. I wanted to see it simply because it looked charming and interesting (and, well, I like Paul Dano), and it turned out to have a lot more to it. A lot of people apparently hated it, though, because they felt it was anti-feminist and...I couldn't disagree more. So if you were worried about that factor, really, go see it and form your own opinion. It was obvious to me that it was written by a woman and that the point was not a man writes the perfect woman.
It's obvious where the whole "this movie is misogynistic!" view comes from. Calvin is not really a great guy, he's selfish and can't see his own problems, and he writes this stereotype girl (perfectly imperfect, charming, beautiful) who comes to life. He jumps at the chance to be with her, and when she starts becoming her own person, he writes changes to make her fit into the box he wants her to be in again. The thing is...it doesn't work. The movie repeatedly says that that girl isn't real, that stereotype isn't a person. When he tries to maker her one, it falls apart. To his credit, he could have done a lot worse with his powers over her, and initially he decided against writing more. But then he did. Anyway. More important to me than the message that that girl isn't real, is the commentary on relationships in general. He created her, he fell in love with this idea, but when she deepens and becomes a real person, he wants to control her so she fits the idea. She loses her identity. Come on, in less literal terms, we all at least know someone who has gone through that. I don't know. I'm all rambly. But...I feel like this movie was making all of those things SO obvious. When she finds out what he's been doing, how he can control her, she leaves. Maybe the fact that the movie had a lot of charming and happy bits as well made people angry, like the message wasn't strong enough? I don't know.
I know that the ending pissed people off because they felt like it undid the work of the rest of the movie. I don't agree. I feel like it's just kind of typical with a lot of ambiguous Hollywood endings lately. He meets her again, she doesn't remember him, and they talk. A lot of people looked at that as: he still has an unfair advantage in knowing about her, he's doing exactly what he did before, he didn't learn at all. I see it like this: he learned a lot, he didn't seek her out, he came across her, and they began talking and...who knows. It could be another relationship, it could simply be a friendship, or they could never talk again. If it is a relationship, it could blow up the same way. Or maybe it could work. It's really ambiguous and not a HAPPY ending.
A common comparison for it is (500) Days of Summer. I think I liked Ruby Sparks more. But they do have similar themes, a guy is in love with the idea of a girl, not the girl herself. Even the "hey there's hope!" ending. Except in Ruby Sparks, the message is even clearer. And...I don't know. I just loved it and it gave me a lot of feelings. I asked Corinne what she thought when we left, and she said "I think I like it." I should ask her if her opinion has changed on that in the last few hours, if she's solidified that like or not.
Ramble ramble.
I'm certainly going to be buying it when it's on DVD. *shrug*