This is the story of a woman who manages a coverup for her son at great expense; this is set in motion by a decision in which she must choose to cover tracks or report an incident to the police. The problem is that the tracks are neither hers nor her son's, and we are expected to empathize with a woman who essentially covers up an accident, and then the coverup spirals out of control. I sat the whole time wishing she'd simply been honest and brave enough to let the incident stand as fact. Instead, she comes off as rather stupid, or at least horribly foolish.
The movie's subject matter is pretty unpleasant -- a 30 year old man has been having sex with her perhaps-of-legal-age boy (the movie skirts this issue, but we know he's ready for college) -- and the mother can't bear for her son's ever-absent father to find out. I can understand a mother's disgust at being shown video footage of what a criminal calls his "blossoming sexuality," but I simply never believed that a mother would commit some of the acts which she does to protect his privacy or reputation or whatever.
Indeed, the audience is insulted: The son is portrayed mainly as a simpering fellow, his eyes always on the verge of tears; his lover is a club owner with enough vanity to drive a swell car and wear nice clothes, but apparently pride not sufficient to remind him of the occasional brushing and flossing. In short, no one needed to yank my chain to make me feel this boy is puppy dog vulnerable and incapable of facing adulthood ramifications of his actions; no one needed to make sure the older lover was slimy enough that I'd be aware of all levels of inpropriety. It's always much more interesting if characters are played against type, but instead we have a club owner who, in every exchange with the boy, must address him with a pet name like "Precious." (But never the same pet name -- we'd hate to risk characterization.)
I had a surge of hope when the mother confronted the blackmailer with the reality of her situation -- how she was going to "try harder" to raise the $50,000 he wanted to steal from her -- and for a little bit, the movie kicked into a nice gear. Suddenly it was fresh and plausible.
But not for long. I won't reveal the ending, but it's like the anti-deus ex machina, even allowing lips to gently brush one another in the wake of tragedy. There were titters in the Oakland theater at the contrivance, and audience members were sort of looking around -- "Do you believe this?"
No, I didn't. I believed a few minutes of the story -- the acting generally is not the problem here -- but those few minutes just weren't worth it. As overrated as GHOST WORLD, this one will soon be forgotten. 5/10
The movie's subject matter is pretty unpleasant -- a 30 year old man has been having sex with her perhaps-of-legal-age boy (the movie skirts this issue, but we know he's ready for college) -- and the mother can't bear for her son's ever-absent father to find out. I can understand a mother's disgust at being shown video footage of what a criminal calls his "blossoming sexuality," but I simply never believed that a mother would commit some of the acts which she does to protect his privacy or reputation or whatever.
Indeed, the audience is insulted: The son is portrayed mainly as a simpering fellow, his eyes always on the verge of tears; his lover is a club owner with enough vanity to drive a swell car and wear nice clothes, but apparently pride not sufficient to remind him of the occasional brushing and flossing. In short, no one needed to yank my chain to make me feel this boy is puppy dog vulnerable and incapable of facing adulthood ramifications of his actions; no one needed to make sure the older lover was slimy enough that I'd be aware of all levels of inpropriety. It's always much more interesting if characters are played against type, but instead we have a club owner who, in every exchange with the boy, must address him with a pet name like "Precious." (But never the same pet name -- we'd hate to risk characterization.)
I had a surge of hope when the mother confronted the blackmailer with the reality of her situation -- how she was going to "try harder" to raise the $50,000 he wanted to steal from her -- and for a little bit, the movie kicked into a nice gear. Suddenly it was fresh and plausible.
But not for long. I won't reveal the ending, but it's like the anti-deus ex machina, even allowing lips to gently brush one another in the wake of tragedy. There were titters in the Oakland theater at the contrivance, and audience members were sort of looking around -- "Do you believe this?"
No, I didn't. I believed a few minutes of the story -- the acting generally is not the problem here -- but those few minutes just weren't worth it. As overrated as GHOST WORLD, this one will soon be forgotten. 5/10