Review: Juno
I am continuing in my quest to watch all of the movies that were nominated for Best Picture this year to see if any of them deserved it… so far, in my opinion, none of them did. Next on the list: Juno.
Plot summary from Netflix:
Facing an unplanned pregnancy, teenage Juno (Ellen Page) devises a plan to locate the proverbial perfect parents to adopt her baby. But the seemingly ideal couple Juno chooses still has some growing up to do. Now, everyone in Juno’s world must do a little soul-searching. Michael Cera co-stars while Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner play the pair of affluent yuppies anxious for a child in this offbeat coming-of-age comedy.
OK, out of all of the Best Picture nominees I’ve seen this one is the best so far but if you’ve read my other reviews you’ll know that’s not saying much. I thought this movie was OK. It had an endearing storyline, I suppose, but the way it was done made it more irritating than endearing. I thought Juno was EXTREMELY annoying and 90% of her dialouge was so forced and pretentious that I found myself rolling my eyes many times. All the stupid ‘I know music better than you’ conversations between her and Jason Bateman’s character were what really put me over the edge. Give me a break. I can’t really even put into words how irritating I found her dialouge, especially with her friends. It was like an immature angst-ridden teen trying to act cool by making people think she’s smart and witty. Painful.
The only reason I’m giving this movie any credit is because I thought they created some interesting characters and I really liked a lot of the actors in the film, especially Jason Bateman (love him!). And it was funny to see Michael and George Michael from Arrested Development in the same movie!
Overall, again, it didn’t live up to the hype, it didn’t deserve a Best Picture nomination, but it was mildly entertaining and it was kind of a cute story.
God, No Country For Old Men better be good because in my estimation, the Academy was sorely mistaken with the rest of these movies. Get it together!
My Rating:
It was OK
Review: There Will Be Blood
Review: Atonement
Review: Michael Clayton
Juno, movie review, Academy Awards, Jason Bateman, Ellen Page, Michael Cera
August 22nd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Well, it’s obvious that your taste in movies differ a lot from the critics and The Academy. In that being said, your opinion is respected. It seems you enjoy the popcorn fun in mainstream summer films more than the unique, slow-paced, sometimes quirky and weird films of the Fall season, which is completely fine. There are movies for everyone, but it’s important that the truly well-made films be rewarded and fortunately that’s exactly what The Academy did last year.
I’ll admit that The Academy has made some controversial decisions in the past (Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan… really?) but for the most part, they do a good job. Juno was actually the only film I thought that didn’t deserve a best picture nomination, but it’s hard to go against the indie-hit of the year. There’s always a reason why indie films like Juno and Little Miss Sunshine do significantly well in the box office… because they’re really good. It also threatened No Country for Old Men’s success because it was simply the likeable and light film of the best picture nominees. There Will Be Blood, though a masterpiece from PTA, was just too strange to win the Oscar. Atonement was a brilliant adaptation, but suited the older members of The Academy while the younger memebers sided towards Juno. And Michael Clayton was just your old fashion, straight up story-telling, legal thriller that made a surprising smash in The Academy.
Once more, I respect your opinions against the Best Picture nominees… but you have to agree that the quality of Michael Clayton is far superior than to a mainstream film like Vantage Point. And the indie-comedy of Juno has far more depth than a film like The House Bunny. But that’s why The Academy picks the winners to these prestigious awards, not the public.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
I appreciate your comments and the fact that you didn’t just write off my opinions completely.
The thing is, I do enjoy all kinds of movies but I only have been reviewing the mainstream summer movies because those are the movies people are interested in. Maybe I should start mixing it up a little bit.
However, what I have always said about my reviews is that I am looking for entertainment. I am not in any way, shape or form a movie snob and I don’t claim to be knowledgable on the technicalities of how movies are made. I only care about certain things: did I enjoy it? Would I watch it again? Did I connect with the characters or material? You know, things like that.
Overall you have to admit, this is the entertainment business. They cannot ignore the fact that the main function is to entertain the audience.
I know the opinion of the Academy does not coincide with the opinion of the masses and that’s fine. But, it doesn’t stop me from disagreeing with their choices. I was not entertained at all by Michael Clayton, Atonement, or There Will be Blood and no matter how well they were made, I’m never gonna watch them again. Therefore, in my opinion, I can’t justify a movie being nominated for Best Picture when it was a chore to sit through it. (In my opinion of course)
I completely understand your comparison of Michael Clayton and Vantage Point but from my perspective, I really enjoyed Vantage Point and regardless of the technicalities of the film making, I walk away remembering Vantage Point, not Michael Clayton.
The reason I got so upset with the choices this year and why I had to watch them all to see for myself, was because I thought American Gangster was a masterpiece and it was completely snubbed.
I just can’t understand how they think or their selection process. I really disagreed with it this year.
Now when The Departed won Best Picture, I couldn’t have agreed more. So we’ll see what happens in the future.
August 22nd, 2008 at 7:24 pm
[...] Link: Movie Review Report [...]