"How ways the world?"
"It wears, sir, as it grows."
Two male leads and a director relying on contemporary cliches of masculinity and it's insecurities, allowing for little exploration of people and leaving a boring aphoristic take on the plight of Men in its place. The characters assume their jealousy too quickly, and without much reason at all. There was no real psychodrama between the two male leads. Are we just supposed to assume that whenever two guys are near each other, they're just going to vie to be the…
Man, Hollywood sure is full of heartless shmucks, huh? How about we get every A-list actor and their buddies to cameo as themselves with a big name Hollywood director with fucking Warner Bros. to produce it. Yeah, and we'll get Oscar and Golden Globe nominations for it too. Yeah baby, that'll show those fuckers.
This is a pretty stupid flex, and I (clearly) resent it for that. But regardless, something disturbing and real was shown to us about Hollywood, and the people that made this movie are a part of it too... and they did a good job with it, despite my globe-spanning eye rolls.
Julie is a very boring character that we are told over and over again is actually very wonderful. The title winks at us, her boyfriends tell us overtly, her mother lets us know, and her father lets us know by /not/ letting /her/ know. But outside of being told, we never see any semblance of her greatness. She veers off the doctor exit of the good-girl-expressway to become an artist, but never really makes any art, nor seems to really…
I was very interested in the morality of Ryoko Itakura and Gondo's pursuits--what was the movie saying about them? Who was right? Why start the Ryoko character in a scene where she is wringing some poor elderly business owners dry, putting struggling people out of business? But this thread seems to have been dropped soon after these scenes.
But this doesn't prove to be a problem, because instead of blind dramatics, Juzo Itami directs with a realist's eye. Between the…