Julie vs. Julia: How to make boeuf bourguignon in your pants

"Hi I'm Julie. I suck. Here's some butter."


Good day. Mr. Money Bags here with my first post, an important public service announcement about a dangerous and stupid new film.
This is not a review so much as warning. Don't see "Julie and Julia". If you know someone who is about to view the film forcibly detain them as they will otherwise become dumb and you will stop liking them.
Seldom have I felt as trapped and angry as I did watching "Julie and Julia". But Mr. Money Bags, you say, you weren't tethered to your couch, you could have left the room, even turned off the TV, if you wanted to end the maddening goings on on screen. True, I respond, but the film is coy and it made me want to watch it. Allow me to explain:
The film is told in two parts, half shit half shinola.
On one hand we have Julie who is played by Amy Adams. Amy Adams has in my opinion has never given a really great performance. Even in "Doubt", a very satisfying movie, she plays a muted role, that doesn't demand much, and lets her get away with marginal acting. I think everyone knows her from a movie called "Enchanted" that I've never seen. She was in "Pumpkin" where I recall she played a sorority bitch and that suited her. I admit I dislike Amy Adams. I think she inherently mooches authority off of Nicole Kidman, because they look alike (not that Nicole Kidman's real great, but she makes wonderful film choices, which works for me.) Amy Adams like Zooey Deschanel and Ellen Page (and yes, Kristen Stewart) relates to the worst part of young-female America. A saddy post-feminism that rejects both traditional feminine roles of wife and mother as well as the pioneering spirit of empowered, ground breakers like Julia Childs. These women play 'alternative' female characters which means they've set the bar low for themselves and are all about their hobbies. Julie has a husband that works for Archeology Magazine. He's nice and I guess he supports her. Julie is out of work and has done nothing compared to her millionaire lady friends. They're all turning 30 and she feels all bummed out, so she starts up a little project to boost her ego. So that's the one hand. In one hand we have a boring actress doing boring non-things. She whines a lot while doing not much and I for one hated the experience. I work diligently to try and forget that insufferable gooey faced phonies like Julie exist in the world. On this hand? You've got shit on your hand.

On the other hand you have two of the most capable actors working today: Meryl Streep and Stanly Tucci. Meryl is Julia Child and she provides the audience with an impersonation that would make Kevin Spacy gag with angry vomit. Stanly Tucci as always is subtle and powerfully real. They live out a brief period of Julia's life while she sets about writing her Mastering the Art of French Cooking. Its a complicated time and while the story is compassionate and endearing, it's also a bit sloppy. Paul Child, Tucci, loses his post in Paris at the consulate against a back drop of McCarthyism, but this is vague and probably lost on most of the audience. There are side plots with Julia's sister, played by Jane Lynch, who I love and am so happy to see in this role even if she gets short changed. Still, the performances in this half are seamless and magnetic. On this hand? Shreds of a phenomenal biopic.
I have a weakness for biography and that's exactly where Nora Ephron gets me pinned. I have nothing positive to say about Nora Ephron. She doesn't want me to like her films. That's obvious. I did slightly enjoy "Bewitched", but in my consideration "Micheal" the movie where Vince Vega plays an angel is close to being the least enjoyable movie I've ever seen. I liked the biographical parts of "Juliie and Julia" and I wanted to see where things go with Meryl and Stanly, not because I care about Julia Child but because I was enjoying seeing them act. Every time we switch back to Julie, I'm vividly reminded of how far from powerful young women today like to think of themselves. We undulate from visions of empowered women breaking though as it were into man's-world to visions of a post-gendered world where woman cannot even define themselves in opposition to masculine categories, so they have to emulate the mythical protests of women a half century ago.
This is how the film traps you. You want to see Meryl Streep act the shit of Julia Child because its a powerful story of a woman doing things against some odds, overcoming the man's kitchen and fighting American anti-intellectualism. We want Julia to win and we know she does so its safe and pleasant. But then that quality is story is bundled next to Julie, who just has a sort of lame narcissistic hobby. Her story is weak and is about weakness. She is not fighting the odds. Her husband just sanctions the project to keep her occupied and it seems to make no difference what happens to her. What's most distressing is the seemingly clear reflections the film makes about its own nature. Julie is always commenting on how perfect Julia is and then we find out (to my sincere pleasure) that Julia knows about Julie and finds her disrespectful. Great! I'm glad. This part of the films serves as a proof that these two generations are so out of touch in terms of feminine values that neither appreciates what the other has done. But why even say that in this film? Even if its true it confuses the moral, which has to be a celebration of Julia Child in some sense. Why do we celebrate Julia Child with a story about a witless loser that copies her and whom Julia doesn't even like? I wanted Julie to be shamed and humiliated. I wanted her to see that her generation has practically eaten away the progress and momentum of her grandmother's generation.
Ultimately, the power and depth of the Julia half justifies sitting though the film. But in retrospect the shallow, imbecilic ramble of the Julie half makes it not worth starting, so don't.
In my version of the film Julie's husband leaves her for good. Then Julia sues Julie and bankrupts her. Julie then has to move home to her mother where she works as a waitress for a while and dates seedy guys with neck tattoos and pickup trucks. She marries again and becomes a home-maker and starts shooting out the babies. She cooks vile middle American casseroles and begins to grow an overwhelming antipathy for Julia and a deep, persistent regret about her boring wasted life. We watch Julie become an old woman whose done absolutely nothing novel with her life and hates herself.
So that's the deal. "Julie and Julia" is a trap for anyone who likes biopics and good acting. Is angering because it's films like this that bring down the quality of our women. Now, I'm no woman, and this movie wasn't really made for me, but I worry that people will see this film and be confused by it (because its poorly written and confusing) and that maybe some young women will like Julie. This can't happen, it might spark the end times, so I'm warning you.

Have a great Monday!
MR MONEY BAGS