Are the kids all right? They most certainly are...

Laser:  Why did you donate your sperm?
Paul:  Because it seemed more fun than donating blood.


The Kids are All Right is the story of a lesbian couple who conceived children using a sperm donor and the subsequent reactions and interactions that ensue when the kids decide they want to meet their "father".  The film was directed by Lisa Cholodenko and was written by Cholodenko and Stuart Blumberg.  A stellar cast including Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo and of course the kids Mia Wasikowska (that's a mouthful) and Josh Hutcherson rounds off an interesting plot worthy of an Oscar nod.  Should it have won?  We'll see.


What I liked about this movie is that it wasn't a film about lesbians - it was a movie about a family undergoing a massive change in their home dynamics.  It doesn't matter that Jules and Nic are lesbians, the idea that the kids wanted to meet their donor could happen to any family.  


While Brokeback Mountain was groundbreaking for portraying the struggle of a gay couple, The Kids are All Right is equally groundbreaking for portraying the struggles of a married couple - gay or straight doesn't really matter - every couple has the potential to face infidelity, and every family certainly has issues with teenage kids.  The story is about the family, Nic and Jules being gay is like an aside note, like Nic being a doctor or Jules being a landscaper and it is hopefully a sign of things to come in cinema where the plot of this film is no longer considered "tricky subject matter" (not my words) but just a great and heartwarming story.


I have yet to fault Annette Bening's acting and this movie is no exception (I think it may have a little bit to do with the fact that she is Mrs. Warren Beatty).  Her performance is so real and at times, it's actually painful to watch what she is going through.  Always having to be the sensible one, the breadwinner, the stricter parent, and to see her role in the family threatened by the arrival of Paul (especially when she learns of the affair) is heartbreaking. 


I'm also a fan of Julianne Moore and her performance is great - but I will admit that sometimes the character grated on my nerves.  I wanted to yell "Grow up!!" at several points in the film.  The character of Jules was at times a bit too cliche for my liking - this is perhaps best summed up in naming Josh Hutcherson's character Laser.  That just annoyed me and I didn't find it believable.  (I didn't think that Nic would have allowed it).  In saying that, I think Moore did a great job in showcasing Jules' frustration in life - and because I always become too engrossed in characters lives - I was happy that she was good at landscaping because it gave her a sense of worth that was grossly missing.


Mark Ruffalo - there are not enough words to explain my love for this man and his acting.  Versatility thy name is Ruffalo.  Much like Ryan Gosling's Dean in Blue Valentine, Mark Ruffalo's portrayal of Paul annoys me at times, but I think it proves what great actors both of these men are because I never thought annoyance was possible with them.  At times, I loved Paul and I wanted him to be part of the kids' lives, at other times, like with Jules I wanted to say grow up.  It was nothing to do with the acting, more the way the character is written.  Again, almost a too cliched Bohemian.  (It could be that Paul was just too cool for school and I was a little jealous - I'm undecided).  I feel bad for him too, because he bears the blame for the affair and when forgiveness is going around, he doesn't get any - and while I hate that he portrayed a cliche I'm going to use one here - it takes two to tango and Jules was a willing participant.  It was unfair that he was ousted from Joni and Laser's lives when Jules got to move back in.


I saw Alice in Wonderland in 3D - it was ok.  It wasn't my favourite movie and I'll admit, I didn't leave a fan of Mia Wasikowska.  To me, that wasn't her breakout role - The Kids are All Right was.  It showcased her range and ability more than Alice did and now, I honestly can't wait to see what she does next.  I like that she chose this after such a big production, and I think with this movie she has written her own ticket to choose what she wants to do.  Joni had the potential to be flat and boring, with Laser being the star of the show but Wasikowska brought a depth to the character that combined a strength and vulnerability that translated onto the screen.  She had 50 million things to juggle - should she agree to Laser's wish to find their donor?  How to fit Paul into her life, how to exclude Paul from her life when she learns of the affair, the affair in general, going off to college and the list goes on.  Wasikowska provides some great work here, but I think the best is yet to come.


What can be said about Josh Hutcherson except that he had me bawling in Bridge to Terabithia and he impressed me beyond belief in this movie.  Like Wasikowska, I expect great things from this young 18 year old.  I loved the way he portrayed the struggle faced with letting Paul in.  The initial excitement at meeting him, and the disappointment when Paul didn't turn out to be what he expected.  I think it's interesting to note that while Laser is Jules' kid, like NicNic's daughter eats up Paul's lifestyle.  Food for thought.  Apart from his name, I can't fault Josh Hutcherson in any way.


I really enjoyed this film and have recommended it to as many people as possible.  I can without a shadow of a doubt confirm that yes, I believe an Oscar nod was deserved (as were the ones that Ruffalo and Bening received) but I will hold out judgement on whether it should have won until after I've reviewed all of the nominees.  If you want to see a film that deals with the delicate intricacies that make up family dynamics, this is one to watch - as are the careers of Wasikowska and Hutcherson.

The Plan

A love affair with cinema is simply a romantic term used in an attempt to dissuade you from thinking that I am a movie geek.  Alas, the more I write (and hopefully you will in fact continue to read what I write - come on, you're already here) you will discover my geekiness no matter what spin I put on it, I can't hide what I am.  If I wanted to do that, there would be far more productive ways than blogging about it.

I feel I must insert a disclaimer here if we are to continue this journey, so here it is (and yes, I will be using CAPS because yes, I am yelling this):

I DO NOT WISH TO BE IN THE PICTURES!  I AM NOT AN ASPIRING ACTRESS / inspiring person maybe/ BUT NOT AN ACTRESS! (although my Academy Award acceptance speech would be mega).

I would not rule out a career in the biz, I just don't want to be in front of the camera - my passion is behind the scenes.  Bugger, another disclaimer:

I DO NOT WISH TO BE A DIRECTOR!!  I DON'T MAKE MOVIES, I APPRECIATE THEM!

Disclaimers and shouting out of the way, my passion stems from watching movies.  Yes, I watch several in the comfort of my own home, but I LOVE (sorry more caps, but that was purely for emphatic purposes, not shouting) going to the movies, sitting in the theatre, popcorn in hand.  To me, the experience of being in a theatre is part of movie magic.  I don't even need people to go with me.  Over the past few years I have learned that I relegated many a good film to the tv screen because I was too afraid to go to the movies myself.  Let me tell you, the day I decided to go and watch a movie on my own, it was exhilarating.  I felt liked I'd burned my bra, broke the glass ceiling, put my face on a Rosie the Riveter poster.  No, I am not equating this small action with feminist movements of the past, but I was liberated.  As a single girl, I was able to go out by myself and watch a movie without caring what the canoodling couple behind me thought.  And while the guy was too busy trying the "yawn + cop a feel" move to enjoy the film, I basked in it.  Why do we need to go with people?  You shouldn't be talking in a theatre anyways (and Lord help you if I hear your phone go off).  And so I urge you to all try this.

I love the escapism that film allows us to experience.  We all want breaks from our lives and what better way than a two hour journey anywhere in the world we want to go?  And with anyone.  I detest the school of thought that spouts off "That is so unrealistic!  That would never happen in real life" - well sir/madam I am not watching Jurassic Park for the reality factor - I save that for delightful gems like Cake Boss.  I also can't be bothered with the naysayers (what a great word) who dismiss a film due to historical inaccuracies.  I remember someone saying to me that the  Keira Knightly version of King Arthur was inaccurate - well jolly good observation - it is in fact a film based on a myth that has been retold/reshaped/rewritten millions of times over the years.  Now I know what you're thinking (at least those of you who know me outside of the blogging world) "Hold the bus here, aren't you a history teacher?"  Well yes, I am.  I'm not saying I'm an advocate for grossly inaccurate artistic licences that try to pass themselves off as history.  I am however in favour of artistic licence used to enhance a story and engage an audience.  We are in a technological age - if I am to be a successful teacher than I must move with the times and as such, cinema will always have a place in my classroom, not only as a story teller, but also as a window into social history.  For example, one only has to look at westerns from the 1950s and 1960s to discover how America perceived its national identity.  (That's your homework - discover American's national identity through 1950s and 1960s westerns - I will accept it in comment form).

This is getting way long -  if this were my acceptance speech, the music would have started playing long ago, and the girls in the beautiful gowns would be motioning to me to park my keester in the audience so that the show can go on.

Ok so now on to the point of this post, as well as this blog as a whole.  I have set myself a challenge.  Starting with this past year, I am going to watch every best picture nominee, rate it, review it, post about it, and then decide who I would christen Best Picture.  The reason that sparked this is because I think it is an absolute farce that we now allow 10 movies to be nominated.  The academy is trying to keep it's finger in everybody's pies instead of focussing on the BEST picture.  We shouldn't feel the need to nominate an animated film just because someone thinks animated films should be included (FYI: I loved Toy Story 3 but you will read more about that later because it was one of TEN movies nominated).  Yes I agree that the academy sometimes favours biopics over other more mainstream pictures, but I strongly believe that films should be considered based on their own merit and not to please everyone.

So that is my task, purely personal, an outlet for the thoughts constantly running through my brain, perhaps even an experiment in self preservation (because isn't that what blogging is all about?).  I encourage you to comment on the films, to agree, disagree, sit on the fence - whatever you think, I want to hear it.  Also, if you think a film has been left out, hard to do with TEN nominees - this is a real bone of contention for me - please share.

Would you believe I had writers' block before I started this entry?  That's all from me for now, but watch this space as I watch the movies...

Laura