Baseball

“I wrote 63 songs this year. They’re all about Jeter.” Just kidding. The game we love, the players we hate, and more.

Culture and Criticism

From Norman Mailer to Wendy Pepper — everything on film, TV, books, music, and snacks (shut up, raisins), plus the Girls’ Bike Club.

Donors Choose and Contests

Helping public schools, winning prizes, sending a crazy lady in a tomato costume out in public.

Stories, True and Otherwise

Monologues, travelogues, fiction, and fart humor. And hens. Don’t forget the hens.

The Vine

The Tomato Nation advice column addresses your questions on etiquette, grammar, romance, and pet misbehavior. Ask The Readers about books or fashion today!

Home » Culture and Criticism

Julie & Julia

Submitted by on February 14, 2010 – 10:35 PM46 Comments

The Julia half of the movie is delightful. Meryl Streep is wonderful, in no small part because Julia Child is written so wonderfully here (and I have fond memories of her from my early childhood).

I sat impatiently through the Julie parts, waiting for them to return to Child, because the comparison is unkinder to Powell than the movie seems to think. Oh boo-hoo I dropped a capon on the floor, oh boo-hoo the food critic isn’t coming to dinner after all, oh boo-hoo my husband wants me to pay attention to him, why do we have to live in Queens — the self-absorption is unrelenting, and in a “character” I have to think the movie wants us to like. Lord knows how many sour notes got tuned out of the first draft if this is what we ended up with.

I admit that my perception of Powell in the film is probably colored by what we now know about that marriage in real life, but side by side with Child, she comes off that much poutier and shallower. Child seems to have genuine passion for cooking and for her husband, and a sense of humor about herself; Powell, at least in the film version, has a genuine passion for attention, and for her husband only when he’s giving her and her project that attention, and no sense of humor about much of anything. When that reviewer calls to tell her that Child didn’t like the idea of the project, my reaction wasn’t to sympathize with Powell or the unceasing subsequent whinging. It was to snort, “Good.”

Streep made me want to rush over to Amazon and buy a bunch of Child-related books, but Adams, whom I usually enjoy, could do nothing to redeem the martyr-complexy Powell and her unflattering cap-sleeve shirts. That said, the movie is paced well, and Nora Ephron doesn’t linger too long on Powell before cutting back to Child. Worth watching; just have your own gimmicky project to work on during the Julie sections. Like, say, watching all the Oscar nominees in a month. Heh.

Death Race 39, Sarah 19; 6 of 24 categories completed

Share!
Pin Share


Tags:              

46 Comments »

  • Todd K says:

    Line-by-line agreement. And if someone as likable and charming as Amy Adams (who, by the way…35?! Wow. Go, Amy.) couldn’t do much with the character, it really had to be a script imbalance. Could anyone have been an improvement, if everything else had remained the same?

    Now, this one, unlike some of the others discussed here in recent days (such as Avatar) may actually work better on television, for the reason you give: you can more easily busy yourself with something else during the dead stretches. I saw it in the theater and found the non-Meryl parts even more of a drag than those scenes of The Devil Wears Prada devoted to Andy and her boring social circle. And there were too many of them (in both movies) for me to say more than “C+.”

  • Tulip says:

    Now I want to tag a LOT of people I know with “unearned self-importance”. :)

  • Omar G. says:

    YES. Julia was a joy, but I thought the Julie parts were just miserable. I would have rather seen a straight-up biopic of Julia Child in the same vein as that half of this movie.

  • attica says:

    The idea to cast Jane Lynch as Child’s sister was freaking inspired. But the scene where Julia learns of her sister’s pregnancy was a microcosm of why Streep is Streep and the rest of us are merely human. Props to the Tooch for so adroitly surfing the wave of that scene, too.

  • Sarah D. Bunting says:

    why Streep is Streep and the rest of us are merely human

    A lot of that was Child, too, I think. Streep is great, but the person she’s playing is compelling aside from that.

    By the same token, recasting Powell wouldn’t have made much difference. I’ve read neither her blog nor the book; maybe she’s less of an asshole in the source material, but as she’s written here, I have trouble seeing how anyone could play her as likable.

    @Omar: Me too.

  • Deanna says:

    I’ve heard this take on the movie from a few people but not expressed as well, Sars. I really want to see it but it is entirely because of the Julia portion. I normally adore Amy Adams but it sounds like she had nowhere to go with the source material.

    @Todd K She is?! 35?! REALLY? Sigh. I’ll just be over here eating Julia Child recipes until they bottle whatever Amy Adams is using to look that good.

  • Suzanne M says:

    So much agreement here. I went into this movie knowing exactly nothing about Julie Powell and I wanted to stab her in the face (Sorry, Amy Adams! You’re adorable!) every time she came on. But oh, the Julia sections were sublime. I could have happily watched a great deal more of Streep’s Julia (and Tucci’s Paul), but I spent much of the movie fervently wishing I’d waited for DVD so I could skip through every moment of Julie Powell. That skipping ability may even make it worth another watch sometime.

    I confess, this movie did inspire an attempt at boeuf bourgignon. I… am no Julia Child.

  • Bria says:

    I haven’t seen the movie yet because I’m still working through the mountain of bile I developed reading the book. Powell comes across as nothing short of *loathsome*. Truly, I have never had a harder time finishing a book than I had with this one. As I understand it, the Powell character was actually toned down in the movie to be less obnoxious. Seriously, Why. So. Much. Throwing. Of. Food.

    On the other hand, My Life In France (source material for the Julia bits) is absolutely delightful. I agree with Sars and Omar – I would have rather seen a Child biopic that was solely based on that book. Sadly, I’m afraid J&J foreclosed that possibility.

  • Rachel says:

    @Omar – I absolutely agree. I think the most disappointing thing to me about Julie and Julia is that now there’s virtually no chance of there being a straight biopic, and even if there is one, it won’t be with Meryl Streep playing her.

  • chaia says:

    I found the Powell in the book to be a complex, empathizeable-with, human lady, but the Powell in the script to be shallow 2-D at its most annoying. But oh the Julia scenes made up for it, and the Julia and her sister scenes even more so!

  • Fiona says:

    I was peeved by the Queens thing in particular, because Queens is actually a food mecca- especially Astoria and LIC, where Powell was living (and neighboring Woodside and Flushing are amazing food sources as well). For a foodie to whine about living in Queens astounds me. Not to mention that the N/W and F lines are all incredibly efficient for getting into midtown- I loved my commute the whole 9 years I lived there. I just bought a house (yay!), but I miss living in Queens very much, because of the great neighborhood vibe and the food, my god, the food!

  • Kari says:

    I have read the book and I have to say that she comes off as much LESS of an asshole in the movie. Unfortunately. Of the two, I preferred the movie – Julie is much more likeable in the movie (believe it or not) AND we get Meryl-as-Julia.

  • kategm says:

    “I’ve read neither her blog nor the book; maybe she’s less of an asshole in the source material, but as she’s written here, I have trouble seeing how anyone could play her as likable.”

    I recently read both of Powell’s books, and Child’s My Life in France. BookJulie Powell is even more insufferable than MovieJulie Powell. The script (and Amy Adams) definitely toned her down. BookJulia Child is pretty damn awesome.

  • Sarah D. Bunting says:

    @Fiona: Seriously. LIC is not exactly the boonies.

    I’d also add that she gets off a subway clearly marked “Times Square” and running the blue and red lines, and then she’s at an intersection near Ground Zero that only the green and yellow lines go to. Isn’t Ephron a New Yorker?

  • Ang. says:

    Meryl was a delight, but I especially loved Stanley Tucci as Paul. He was just adorable, and they seemed so sweet together. I could have watched two more hours of them.

    I usually love Amy Adams, too, but this was the exception. (Also, what was up with that terrible haircut?)

    At first, I was sort of interested to read “Cleaving,” even with the knowledge that Powell comes off as an asshole, but I’m a vegetarian and I think that all the descriptions of dead animals and dead animal flesh would bother me. It’s good to know that I’m not missing anything.

  • Susan says:

    There are a bunch of Julie Powells. I was an early reader of the “Julie / Julia Project” and really liked that Julie, who wrote in (extended, funny) detail about her struggles with each night’s menu, and who found a kind of redemption from her sheer hard work and determination. Then there’s the Julie / Julia book Julie Powell, who’s less likable: as she couldn’t replicate all the recipes with commentary, she was forced to write more about her (less interesting) self. And now there’s the second book Julie Powell. Many, many of the bad reviews on Amazon seem to be one-star reviews of her _as a person_. That has got to hurt.

  • Sharon says:

    Ugh, the Julie parts made me want to vomit. I was happy at the end when she found out Julia was pissed at her stupid little self-involved project. What a loser. Almost ruined the movie, but Streep and Tucci’s fabulous performances saved it. And Adams is a little whiny, no?? I don’t believe I’ve seen her in anything else.

  • When that reviewer calls to tell her that Child didn’t like the idea of the project, my reaction wasn’t to sympathize with Powell or the unceasing subsequent whinging. It was to snort, “Good.”

    Oh, I’m so glad it wasn’t just me and my husband. MoviePowell’s incessant self-absorption was so grating that I couldn’t sympathize with her at all by the end of the movie. I was *happy* when she found out that Julia Child didn’t think what she was doing was important or serious. Cold-hearted, but what can you do.

    @Ang. — no kidding about the haircut! I wouldn’t have said there was any haircut in the world that could make Amy Adams look frumpy, but … wow.

    @Sharon — I think it’s worth giving Adams another chance. I’ve liked her work in other movies, but couldn’t stand her character here.

  • Deirdre says:

    But the scene where Julia learns of her sister’s pregnancy was a microcosm of why Streep is Streep and the rest of us are merely human. Props to the Tooch for so adroitly surfing the wave of that scene, too.

    Attica, so true. That just broke my heart. There were a few references in the movie to how badly Child wanted a baby, and Streep played them all well, obviously, but that was the best one right there.

    Pretty much every review I read before seeing the film said about the same thing as Sars: man, this is a great half of a film. I don’t think I’ve ever been in complete agreement with so many critics before. Such a wasted opportunity to do a proper, in-depth biopic.

    Oh, and this is the second movie with Stanley Tucci that made me incredibly hungry (Big Night being the first). Can anyone think of a third, so it’s officially a trend?

  • RJ says:

    This is yet another film I haven’t seen, but this is exactly what I’ve heard about it – that Adams’ character is annoying, but Streep is wonderful. Maybe I’ll add this one to Netflix. :)

  • Maggles says:

    I mostly agree with the review, although I did feel a pang of sympathy when Julie found out that Julia hated her. She had, after all, devoted a year of her life to the woman, asshole or not.

    Ang., my mother and sisters (including kategm up there) actually decided to get me Cleaving for Christmas when I decided to go vegetarian, since they’re so nice like that ;-) I was able to get through the details about the meat because I was able to separate myself from it and just recognize the information for exactly what it was. The marriage and graphic sex with EVERYTHING THAT HAD A PULSE BUT ESPECIALLY WITH AN ASSHOLE THAT DOESN’T EVEN PAY ATTENTION TO HER was what really got to me!

  • Germaine says:

    For anyone hesitating to watch it b/c of the Julie parts- that’s what fast forward is for. Just stick with Julia and you’ll be fine b/c as we all know Meryl Streep rocks!

  • Diane says:

    Apropos of nothing, I’m cracking up here that so many posts revolve around the concept that thirty-five is somehow necessarily old or unappealing. Hee.

    I saw the flick because a friend wanted to go, and I enjoy *her* company very much, so it was a social thing rather than any form of actual interest in the product. I agree with, apparently, almost everyone – that the structure ended up making me yearn for a Julia Child biopic. The NPR link at the link above, in defense of the movie, did make an interesting point: that Julia’s role in our culture has been, almost above all, that of a teacher; that to leave out her impact by illustrating a student’s experience (perhaps especially a somewhat hapless one) in such a story would be a miscalculation. That’s a very fair point, and biopics *do* have weaknesses, no matter how much better one would be than what we did end up getting. Ultimately, and unfortunately, the student who got the most attention, and a therefore book deal, and therefore this movie, turns out to be, in cinematic and personal terms to embody the very definition of “inessential”. Thus a half-crappy movie was born.

    Also: Norah Ephron. I’m just sayin’.

  • Jini McClelland says:

    I loved the movie…definitely inspired me to try the boeuf bourgignon (it was fabulous, if I don’t say so myself). I didn’t like the Powell parts too much but didn’t hate them. It hasn’t stopped me from re-watching a lot.

    I read both books and yes, My Life in Paris was amazing. The Powell stuff? Not so much. I didn’t think it was possible to dislike the real Powell more than the movie version (Amy, I still love you. It’s not your fault.) She is a whiny, self absorbed harpy. I blogged about this exact same thing back in December. Blech, Julie Powell.

    I didn’t want to read Cleaving before I read your blog, Sarah…now even less so. Cheating cheater who cheats is not my idea of a good true story. [/personal issues]

  • Rhiannon says:

    I can’t be the only one who thought Tucci got totally robbed in not being nominated for this role. Streep is lovely, of course, but he really made the movie for me.

  • elissa says:

    This movie inspired me to snatch up a copy of Julia Child’s Mastering the Art of French Cooking, and that is one amazing cook book. You can hear Julia Child’s voice (or maybe now its Meryl-as-Julia) instructing you on the difference between American and French dinner guests.

  • The Mystery Amanda says:

    I feel like Amy Adams basically did the best she could with what she had, which… wasn’t much. She’s been adorable in other movies, but I think what was probably intended to be “adorable and childlike” in Powell came off as “screechy and narcissistic” in the source material and, well, there’s only so many places you can go with that. If it tells you anything, when the fact that she’d had an affair came to light there were several comments from my friends along the lines of, “she found TWO men who are that masochistic?”

    So basically I’d have to agree with everyone else that Julia/Meryl pretty much makes the movie. (Being “statuesque” myself, I also appreciated the fact that they had some shout outs to the fact that Julia Child’s height was not always easy on her without turning it into a joke. I know, CRI MOAR, TALL GIRL, but I know very few tall women who didn’t enjoy the line about standing out in some way or another.) I did read a few pages of the book the movie is based on while waiting around in Borders one day; no thoughts yet on whether Julie Powell comes off a bit less shrieky there, but my opinion so far is basically, “would read it, would not pay for it.”

  • Dorine says:

    I saw this movie on the airplane in the middle of I’m-on-my-way-to-Hawaii-for-the-very-first-time euphoria, so I rather enjoyed it. Or, most of it — what I remember telling people was that it started off fun and endearing but lost momentum somewhere, and the last third seemed rather dry and uninteresting. Now that I realize it, this was when the Julia sections tailed off and we were left mostly with the end of the Julie story — not nearly as endearing.

  • Erin W says:

    Now I’m gonna come in here and defend the Julie half of Julie and Julia. It’s like this, I guess: I connected with that character. Maybe it’s the self-absorbed blogger in me.

    I think what it came down to was this basic notion that Julia Child was a talented, amazing, special person. Julie is a person who had her job and her husband and basically nothing else going on, and she tried to fight it. She tried to rise above her routine by devoting herself to something. So, it was small. So, it was arguably something she shouldn’t have gained fame for. It still was sort of inspiring to me. (I set goofy challenges for myself, also. Right now I’m working on “30 Things to Do Before I’m 30.”)

    I liked the moment when Julie was writing her blog and typed the line about fighting with her husband and then deleted it. Like she realized in that moment that she wasn’t the story. It was a small victory, but it was there. (OK, so she didn’t learn it in real life; that doesn’t matter to me. It’s a movie.)

    In total agreement that Meryl was utterly awesome, though. Loved when she was eating that buttery fish dish and just kept going “Oh, it’s just so– I just can’t– Oh!”

  • Emily says:

    I don’t understand the Julie hate. I read the book, really enjoyed it, and found Powell very sympathetic. I actually haven’t watched the movie because I heard how it portrayed Julie and didn’t want to have my memory of the book changed in such a negative way.

  • Sarah D. Bunting says:

    She tried to rise above her routine by devoting herself to something. So, it was small. So, it was arguably something she shouldn’t have gained fame for.

    I have no problem with her doing it, or gaining fame for it. Good for her on both counts. The project is interesting, but the person is off-putting to me, and she’s by no means required to be a sweetheart to do something like this, or to get a book deal; nobody is. But a big part of the “hook” here is that you root for her to finish, or identify with her in some way, and I found it hard to root for her to do anything besides cram it with walnuts.

    Like I said, maybe reading the original blog would have given me a better experience of her, but based on what little of her writing I’ve read, I tend to doubt it. Affected, defensive…I don’t think she’s without talent, but I’m not inclined to investigate her work further.

  • Peach says:

    I was excited about this movie because I was an early reader of the original blog and stuck with it throughout the venture and the blog itself was pretty awesome as others said. It was enjoyable seeing a writer talk about the trials and tribulations about the cooking ventures. And as for Queens not being a food mecca, I wasn’t aware that it really was, but during the blogging days, Julie was (or came across so in the blog) so much a novice she didn’t even know where to go to find the ingredients she needed and seemed truly baffled by the culinary world she was wading in.

    When the book came out, I was excited and happy for her… until I read it and it was… not the blog. Seeing the “behind-the-scenes” perspective of Julie it was disenchanting and really spoiled the blog for me. But I went to see the movie, hoping it would capture the blog feeling more than the book feeling.

    I, too, LOVE LOVE LOVED the Julia parts and was also inspired to cook and love and enjoy life they way Julia was portrayed in the film. Julie in the film was sort of a mix of the novice chef from the blog and the harpie from the book. I couldn’t even imagine reading “Cleaving.” I’m glad you linked to the review so I can stay far away.

  • La BellaDonna says:

    I’m ALL for a biopic about the amazing Julia Childs! I would LOVE to see Meryl Streep as Julia during her OSS days! The most AMAZING people seem to have been spies for the Good Guys during WWII. Julia was one of them, and I’d be happy to see some of that Julia on screen, too!

  • Jen S says:

    I read the first book without knowing anything about the blog, and really identified with Julie–we hated a lot of the same foods, tried acting but realized we didn’t have the stomach for it–and liked the idea of picking out a rabbit hole and just sticking with it. But even then I remember finishing up the book and thinking “Okay, good for you…but what are you going to write about next? Maybe you shouldn’t have quit your day job this quick.”

    Aaaaaannnnnd…. Cleaving. Wow. It was like reading one of those Choose Your Own Adventure books based off of Jekyll and Hyde and seeing what would have happened if I kept picking B.

    And as much as I got furious and frustrated with Julie in that tome, Eric got a glass of Haterade dumped down his T shirt too. Nobody puts up with that much crap without loving his victim status, at least a bit, and enjoying the fact that he can endlessly torture his spouse while simultaneously coming off as completely noncomplicit in this tawdry little pile of misery laundry. Takes two to tango, no matter who chose the music, venue, and shoes.

  • K. says:

    “I have read the book and I have to say that she comes off as much LESS of an asshole in the movie.”

    Agreed. She comes off as whiny and navel-gazing in the movie, but Amy Adams has a natural sweetness that comes through in her work, I think, and the Julie in the book wasn’t sweet AT ALL. I was reading it like “Who would want to know this person?” I think I remember reading that Julie had a bit of a problem with casting Adams, because she didn’t think Adams was bitchy enough, so at least she’s self-aware.

    “Also, what was up with that terrible haircut?”
    What a terrible wig that was. I have no idea why that was even necessary, but if she had to wear a wig, why did it have to look like that? The woman sitting next to me muttered “Terrible wig” as soon as Adams came onscreen.

  • Katie says:

    I agree with so many of the comments (and of course Sars’s spot-on commentary), but I felt I had to add my own two cents. For me, it was that Julie lacked a sense of perspective. I get that she set herself a difficult challenge; I get that she was frustrated at points; I even get that she was interacting with readers who were looking forward to the next installment. None of these things, though, justify treating your husband (who seems to be trying very hard to keep you happy and to support you in the book and the movie) like dirt. All those times when she breaks down when the dishes don’t turn out right (and believe me, they often don’t turn out right for me, and that upsets me, and I DEFINITELY get the way that a little thing can be the thing that sets you off when a bunch of other stuff is frustrating)–those times just drove me crazy. And by the time she got to the movie, that’s sort of the fourth set of self-indulgences–the first time when they happen, the second time when she blogs (here I’m assuming that the book follows life and the blog, because I don’t know for sure about either of those), the third time when she writes the book about it, and the movie becomes the fourth moment. It just all struck me as very self indulgent.

    Of course, Meryl Streep is WONDERFUL in the movie and My Life in France richly repays the reading.

  • autiger23 says:

    I just watched this yesterday and Sars put what I felt so perfectly, I can just point to this when people ask me what I thought about it. Thanks, Sars! :)

    @Diane- I can’t speak for the commenters, but I think their comments were more along the lines that she looks *nothing* like 35. I turn 34 in two months and, in the movie, she looks like eight years younger than me. It’s kind of nutty.

  • Brigid says:

    Too funny…..35 isn’t old at all but I know so many 35 year olds that look MUCH younger than Amy Adams so I don’t really see her as looking young for her age. I actually thought she looked older than she was in Enchanted. She is quite beautiful though!

  • Todd K says:

    [I can’t speak for the commenters, but I think their comments were more along the lines that she looks *nothing* like 35.]

    Thanks, autiger23; you got it. I had seen Adams listed in the newspaper’s “birthdays” section last time hers came around, and I thought to myself, “No kidding?” Not only because she looks and plays younger today, but because I first noticed her in Catch Me If You Can and Junebug not all that long ago, where she was absolutely believable as *very* young women. Adults, but only just.

    I didn’t see any post here even hinting that 35 is old or unattractive, let alone revolving around that view.

  • @Katie — I completely agree about MoviePowell’s lack of perspective. I loved the concept of her blog and thought it was a really cool challenge, and I respect the hell out of anyone who finds a way to bust themselves out of a rut. But MoviePowell’s total lack of self-awareness and humor really grated on me. I think that was why I found Julia Child’s dismissal of the project such a wonderful dose of schadenfreude — finally someone was telling Julie that her project WASN’T the most important thing ever.

    Do I respect that Julie Powell cooked all of Julia Child’s recipes in a year, and got two book contracts out of it? Yes. Did I enjoy watching her movie counterpart throw tantrums and wallow in self-absorption? No way.

  • Jo says:

    I didn’t mind the Julie character, but maybe it’s because I loved Meryl Streep’s performance so much that it made the entire movie better.

    I haven’t read either of her books or the blog, but I had no idea the marriage was so crappy. What a horrible person. Yuck.

    “And Adams is a little whiny, no?? I don’t believe I’ve seen her in anything else.”

    I don’t think she’s whiny in anything else, but the only other movies I’ve seen her in were “Doubt,” where she was a pretty meek character, and bits and pieces of “Enchanted,” which I really enjoyed.

  • Robin in Philly says:

    I read ‘Julie & Julia’ on my honeymoon, and WANTED to like it. I was poised to empathize with Julie: over 30, former drama major, Buffy fan, tiny apartment, no baby, miserable dead-end job, wannabe writer, wannabe foodie who has epic disasters and subsequent breakdowns in the kitchen.

    And yet, I couldn’t do it. First, the book screamed, “Blog Writer Who Got a Book Deal”–you can tell she’s trying too hard to be witty & pad out the story. Second, Julie Powell came off as such a self-indulgent, whiny jackass that it made ME want to clean up my ways and re-think how I treat my saintly husband. I found her almost sympathetic in the film. ALMOST. I may have been able to do it, if I had not a) just read ‘My Life in France,’ and b) flipped through the first chapter of ‘Cleaving.’ Taken on its own merits, the film is a lovely Valentine to marriage, but the revelation of Powell’s real-life affair leaves a sour taste in the mouth.

    That said, I found Meryl’s performance as Julia so incandescent, I bought the DVD. (Haven’t quite worked up the courage to make boeuf bourguignon. Yet.)

  • ccooper says:

    HATED HATED HATED BookPowell. More than the whininess, the self-absorption, the self-indulgent jackassiness… Powell is NOT A GOOD WRITER. I finally stopped torturing myself and threw the book against the wall. Then I reread My Life in France and Mastering the Art of French Cooking, and got the bad taste out of my mouth (and my brain).

    The only way I’d see the movie is by fast-forwarding to the Julia parts.

  • Alison says:

    Chiming in late here to agree with others that loved the original Powell blog. Hers was the first blog I ever read regularly. It was a sparkling delight, and seemed full of wit and warmth. I never even picked up the book, because it quickly became clear from reviews that she should have shut her mouth while she was ahead. I wish the Powell parts of the movie had been based on the personality that came through in the blog rather than the (apparently more accurate) book. Then Ephron could have used the Powell counterpoints to illustrate Julia’s lasting legacy, rather than to contrast the whiny with the cheerful.

    I still think the movie’s worth it for Meryl’s and Stanley’s performances. What a wonderful portrait of a happy marriage.

  • Sandman says:

    I agree with attica (and others) about the moving, understated scene where Julia finds out about her sister’s pregnancy; both Tucci (“the Tooch”, hee) and Streep do such lovely work there – and throughout, really. I never read Powell’s blog when it was running, though I have read the book. I thought she was actually more annoying in the movie version – through the fault, I think, does not lie with Adams, whom I adore. The script focuses too much on Julie’s crises and drama-queen tendencies and sometimes plain ill temper. The book includes these, but she comes across as more self-aware and humble than in the movie. I thought the book did a pretty good job of showing how much she loved her husband (though, since Cleaving even exists, maybe that’s not as true as I thought?). I wouldn’t say Adams playing whiners as a usual thing; the character she plays in Junebug is anything but.

    Streep can do no wrong, as far as I’m concerned, but I can’t believe Stanley Tucci wasn’t nominated for his role. The Julia parts make vivid the extraordinary partnership their marriage must have been. I, too, have made, boeuf à la bourguignonne a time or two since seeing the movie (though I bought The French Chef Cookbook, rather than the two-volume MtAoFC monster. Er – so far.) Oh, and Jane Lynch as Dorothy? LOVE.

  • Molly says:

    Heh. I saw this movie in theaters with my parents, and conferred with other family members after the fact, and we all said pretty much exactly what you did. Essentially, “Couldn’t it have just been Julia?” I love Amy Adams so hard – drama or comedy, the girl never misses – but she can only give so much to a character who is utterly impossible to like.

Leave a comment!

Please familiarize yourself with the Tomato Nation commenting policy before posting.
It is in the FAQ. Thanks, friend.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>