MetaChat - Saw "Kids are Alright" . . . .Spoilers

MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.

31 July 2010

Saw "Kids are Alright" . . . .Spoilers A hightly anticipated movie in our household. . .→[More:]I was left sort of bleh about it, after seeing it. What sticks with me today is the PRODUCT PLACEMENT that must have really helped the bottom line of the production. I mean:
Bell Helmets
Vaurnet
iPhone
Volvo
Home Depot
Firesteed Winery and other wines.

It was a bit over the top.

Annette Bening and Julianne Moore were really good. The actors who played the kids were really good, as was Mark Ruffalo.

But the sum of the parts was off, somehow. My wife was upset that the Moore character was partaking in, as Dan Savage would put it, a little dick on the side. The circumstances in the movie (the Bening character's behavior) created the emotional conditions that would have made such a move more likely.

She (my wife) took it as a Statement about lesbian ltr's. I just saw it as one story, and heaven knows I have known several women over the years who identify as lesbian and have also done that other thing on the side now and then. We have also known 3 female couples in which each partner got pregnant and had a kid, in turn.

I did like the fact that the end was very untidy. You were maybe rooting for the couple to make it, although it is hard to see the Moore character happy, in the long term, with this.

Anyway, I am not being very coherent. What did you think if it, if you saw it?

post by: danf at: 18:18 | 8 comments

Actually it is called The Kids are All Right

posted by danf 31 July | 18:19

I liked it.

As for the Jules/Paul relationship, I don't think it was important that Paul was male. A lot of people fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum of sexuality, and there's no reason to pigeonhole everyone as 100% gay or 100% straight. I think the key was that he was showing her attention and appreciation (which she wasn't getting from Nic), and she saw her children in him, which made for a heightened connection for her.

I felt very bad for Paul at the end. He didn't ask to be contacted, but he was, and he found a connection with his kids and with Jules and it was yanked away from him. I hope that if the movie went on longer like real life, the kids would have gotten back in touch with him.

posted by amro 31 July | 18:30

I should add that I don't even think it was very important that Nic and Jules were lesbians... (And I wonder if their somewhat androgynous names were meant to project that their genders weren't that important.) It was just a portrait of two people struggling in a longterm romantic relationship. They could have been men, or a man and a woman, or whatever.

posted by amro 31 July | 18:33

I had the feeling that Paul will realize that Tanya wants to be more than his sexual friend...and things will work out for him.

They don't explain how Laser got his name, but it's also the Yiddish version of Lazarus. My grandfather was named this, but Anglicized it to Louis when he came to the US.

posted by brujita 01 August | 03:12

They don't explain how Laser got his name, but it's also the Yiddish version of Lazarus.

Do you think this is symbolic in some way? I don't know anything about the biblical Lazarus.

posted by amro 01 August | 04:18

It wasn't at all clear to me what was going to happen next. I think that possibly the kids would have kept some sort of contact with Paul.

It was also unclear to me where Jules was going to end up. Will she keep looking for other landscape clients? Also, Nic has a lot of ground to make up at the end. You can't compare a sex life, 20 years on, with a brand, spanking new one, but irl, stuff like that can influence decision-making.

The setting looked a lot like Eagle Rock to me, or maybe Silver Lake. There are a lot of nice old sections in LA.

posted by danf 01 August | 09:44

Amro, it might just be a "naming the kid for the grandparent" thing.

Wikipedia says Lazar is the Aramaic version of Eleazar (who was Moses' nephew).

posted by brujita 02 August | 03:51

A lot of people fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum of sexuality, and there's no reason to pigeonhole everyone as 100% gay or 100% straight.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I was just having this conversation with a friend this weekend. Things change, people change; the worst thing we can do is label someone as "X" and be done with it. We all contain multitudes and depths that may be difficult to keep track of, we shouldn't be so quick to take shortcuts with out mental models of each other. All the more so when you're in a close relationship with someone.

I haven't seen the movie, but it sounds like that was at work here. After a while, you start to assume "X" about your partner, so when they behave differently, it feels like a betrayal. I think the strongest relationships are the ones that remain flexible... and surprising... for both parties.

posted by Eideteker 02 August | 12:12

← OMG Hehehe! || Overused movie music. →

HOME || REGISTER || LOGIN