Life itself is the proper binge.
Well, I went to see the movie Julie & Julia yesterday, and I will say, it was delightful. I’m sure you’ve heard that Meryl Streep’s portrayal of Julia Child was stupendous. You honestly forget that you are watching an actress rather than the lady herself. Meryl Streep has mastered Julia’s verbal inflections astonishingly well. What a funny and spirited woman she must have been. I am now curious to read her book, “My Life in France” and, along with, probably, the majority of the people leaving the theater, even more inclined to cook her Beef Bourguignon. Amy Adams played a delightfully sweet, but self-conscious character that you can’t help but love. I think Amy Adams would be the perfect replacement to all those charming roles Meg Ryan used to play (and who seems to have disappeared from the Hollywood scene). But really, who can blame her? Who can maneuver through that weird, self absorbed world for very long without becoming weary of it?
The scenes in France, during the 1950’s, were a visual feast: the polished and feminine clothes, the elegant interiors, the burst of red and green from flowers and produce that pop against the butter colored stone buildings. I asked my movie buddy, who has lived in France, “Does it still look like that? Is it still that beautiful?” She nodded and expressed an emphatic yes.
And then the movie moves to modern day New York: dirty, messy, ugly and, metaphorically speaking, hangin’ out everywhere. You like the contemporary characters, you can even relate to them. They are certainly more familiar and comfortable than the characters we’ve just left in 1950’s France because, frankly, they don’t demand anything from you other than: like me, be nice to me, and don’t judge me and I’ll show you the same courtesy. But you know, somehow I like the vigor and sharpness from those stuffy souls of old. They are far more interesting. In fact, the main, modern character, Julie, only becomes more interesting when she starts to demand something from herself, 524 recipes in 365 days. And she cooks her heart out, letting Julia guide her through the cuisine of France and then through a bit of self discovery as she learns what she is capable of: sharing her life with others, following through with set goals, mastering the art of cooking, tackling her fears, and finally fulfilling her dream of becoming a writer. The movie travels back and forth between the two worlds showing you, if only superficially, the parallel between the two lives and how the passion and life of one woman inspires and ignites the other. The contrast between the two worlds was a bit agitating to me as it (unintentionally I suspect) rubs ones face in the sloppiness of our age, something that I regularly lament. During one scene, which did evoke a mild chuckle from me, Julie bakes a decadent chocolate cake from Julia’s cookbook; she sets it down before her husband who, after tasting it, literally rubs his face with it as an expression of its deliciousness. Apparently, verbal expression was not sufficient. Isn’t that cute? Seeing a grown adult revert to the table manners of a toddler? I suppose it would be just as adorable, if the food was not to his liking, to see him spit it out across the table with a resounding, “Yuk!” Really, when did slovenliness become cute? I know I harp, but really!
The movie was written and directed by Nora Ephron who wrote, “When Harry Met Sally”, “You’ve Got Mail” (which is one of my favorites) and “Sleepless in Seattle.” I have always loved her writing style which highlights the quirky and the charming and often illustrates the simple magic and mystery of love. And that is what this wonderful movie is, a love story from beginning to end. It’s about Julia and Paul’s love for one another, Julie and her husband’s shared love, Julie’s love for Julia, and Julie and Julia’s love of cooking and, ultimately, sharing that love with others. Because, really, isn’t that the point of love?
I was so enchanted with Julie's movie character that I looked up her blog when I came home. I am sad to say that she does not appear to be the charming woman that Amy Adams portrays, but instead seems to be a bit of a clod. She states in one of her most current posts that she hates what Republicans stand for, finds them frightening, blah, blah, blah and that she thinks swearing is “real.” A description I especially loathe as it means nothing but expresses self satisfaction at not being a snob. A reversed snobbery if you ask me. Very stars upon thars and Sneetches like. Apparently the Republican hating and scattered swearing is fodder that commonly feeds her book and blog. Maybe she thinks the “F” word adds color to an otherwise bland discussion. Like how the flowers and produce add color to the otherwise monotone streets of France. She likes to “spice” things up a bit. I suppose it does add color but more along the lines of graffiti covered walls and discarded plastic shopping bags, a rather dull and dirty color. “They have been at a great feast of languages and stolen the scraps.”
Anyway, she’s certainly entitled to her opinion and should, indeed, feel free to express it however “colorfully” she’d like, in her own blog, without censor. I just found her comments off putting and rigid and would be equally turned off if it was a Republican making similar statements about a Democrat. Frankly, I’m married to neither party and find politicians, in general, a little too slippery to loathe or to love with such religious fervor. In most cases, attitudes like Julie’s strike me as boring and tiresome. My general attitude towards her attitude is…”Whatever…” None the less, I loved the movie. It is like most movies, a different animal than the book, or the author for that matter.
The scenes in France, during the 1950’s, were a visual feast: the polished and feminine clothes, the elegant interiors, the burst of red and green from flowers and produce that pop against the butter colored stone buildings. I asked my movie buddy, who has lived in France, “Does it still look like that? Is it still that beautiful?” She nodded and expressed an emphatic yes.
And then the movie moves to modern day New York: dirty, messy, ugly and, metaphorically speaking, hangin’ out everywhere. You like the contemporary characters, you can even relate to them. They are certainly more familiar and comfortable than the characters we’ve just left in 1950’s France because, frankly, they don’t demand anything from you other than: like me, be nice to me, and don’t judge me and I’ll show you the same courtesy. But you know, somehow I like the vigor and sharpness from those stuffy souls of old. They are far more interesting. In fact, the main, modern character, Julie, only becomes more interesting when she starts to demand something from herself, 524 recipes in 365 days. And she cooks her heart out, letting Julia guide her through the cuisine of France and then through a bit of self discovery as she learns what she is capable of: sharing her life with others, following through with set goals, mastering the art of cooking, tackling her fears, and finally fulfilling her dream of becoming a writer. The movie travels back and forth between the two worlds showing you, if only superficially, the parallel between the two lives and how the passion and life of one woman inspires and ignites the other. The contrast between the two worlds was a bit agitating to me as it (unintentionally I suspect) rubs ones face in the sloppiness of our age, something that I regularly lament. During one scene, which did evoke a mild chuckle from me, Julie bakes a decadent chocolate cake from Julia’s cookbook; she sets it down before her husband who, after tasting it, literally rubs his face with it as an expression of its deliciousness. Apparently, verbal expression was not sufficient. Isn’t that cute? Seeing a grown adult revert to the table manners of a toddler? I suppose it would be just as adorable, if the food was not to his liking, to see him spit it out across the table with a resounding, “Yuk!” Really, when did slovenliness become cute? I know I harp, but really!
The movie was written and directed by Nora Ephron who wrote, “When Harry Met Sally”, “You’ve Got Mail” (which is one of my favorites) and “Sleepless in Seattle.” I have always loved her writing style which highlights the quirky and the charming and often illustrates the simple magic and mystery of love. And that is what this wonderful movie is, a love story from beginning to end. It’s about Julia and Paul’s love for one another, Julie and her husband’s shared love, Julie’s love for Julia, and Julie and Julia’s love of cooking and, ultimately, sharing that love with others. Because, really, isn’t that the point of love?
I was so enchanted with Julie's movie character that I looked up her blog when I came home. I am sad to say that she does not appear to be the charming woman that Amy Adams portrays, but instead seems to be a bit of a clod. She states in one of her most current posts that she hates what Republicans stand for, finds them frightening, blah, blah, blah and that she thinks swearing is “real.” A description I especially loathe as it means nothing but expresses self satisfaction at not being a snob. A reversed snobbery if you ask me. Very stars upon thars and Sneetches like. Apparently the Republican hating and scattered swearing is fodder that commonly feeds her book and blog. Maybe she thinks the “F” word adds color to an otherwise bland discussion. Like how the flowers and produce add color to the otherwise monotone streets of France. She likes to “spice” things up a bit. I suppose it does add color but more along the lines of graffiti covered walls and discarded plastic shopping bags, a rather dull and dirty color. “They have been at a great feast of languages and stolen the scraps.”
Anyway, she’s certainly entitled to her opinion and should, indeed, feel free to express it however “colorfully” she’d like, in her own blog, without censor. I just found her comments off putting and rigid and would be equally turned off if it was a Republican making similar statements about a Democrat. Frankly, I’m married to neither party and find politicians, in general, a little too slippery to loathe or to love with such religious fervor. In most cases, attitudes like Julie’s strike me as boring and tiresome. My general attitude towards her attitude is…”Whatever…” None the less, I loved the movie. It is like most movies, a different animal than the book, or the author for that matter.