Let me start with a brief outline of the plot which is "loosely" based on actual events. To avoid confusion, I'll make no reference to the actual events. The "facts" in my outline reflects what is presented in the movie.
Some 20 years ago, 36-year-old married woman Gracie (Julianne Moore) had sex with a 13-year-old boy Joe (Charles Melton), got convicted for child rape and, in prison, gave birth to a girl fathered by Joe. After serving her term, she married Joe, and they had a pair of twins. The family of five carries on, at present, as a perfectly normal, happy middle-class family, living in a large waterfront house in Savannah.
While the incident, needless to say, was met with considerable public indignation, it was after all two decades ago. To Gracie, it is as if it had never happened. The only thing slightly out of the ordinary about her marriage, to Gracie, is the age and ethnic differences (Joe is half-Korean, in fact both the character and the actor), neither of which should cause even a raise in eyebrows.
The story really starts when someone decides to make a movie out of Gracie's story. Elizabeth (Natalie Portman) who has been cast to portray Gracie, visits them in the aforementioned idyllic Savannah neighborhood.
While nothing seems to be out of the ordinary, there are a couple of suggestive hints in the opening scenes. The house is bubbling with activities, barbecuing and swimming outside (with screaming kids) and kitchen preparations inside. Gracie goes to the fridge, opens it. For a split second, the expression on her face brings flashes of a scene in Stephen King's "It", when somebody opens the fridge and sees Stanley Uris's severed head inside. What Gracie mumbles, however, is not quite as exciting "There aren't enough hot dogs". But why such exaggeration? I think that is to serve notice that while "May December" is billed as comedy (indeed included in that category in the Golden Globe best picture nomination), don't expect an easy ride.
After Elizabeth's arrival and getting acquainted with the family, there is nothing unusual about an actor's effort in understanding the protagonist she is going to portray. Yet, consider this first exchange at the door of the house where the two women first meet. Elizabeth says "oh, I though you would be taller". Nothing unusual in that. Gracie replies "We are basically the same size". Nothing unusual. Without missing a beat comes Elizabeth's rejoinder "We are basically the same". Suggestive.
As characters interact, morsels of their personality and experiences, when revealed, serve to mystify, rather than clarify. When the two women chat casually while working on some floral arrangements, Gracie intimates that she does not dwell on the past. Elizabeth acknowledges that she is exactly the opposite.
There is no convoluted plot. Not even a plot in the conventional sense, you may say. Part of the movie runs like Elizabeth's investigation procedurals, setting up meetings and talking to various people, starting with Gracie's ex-husband, followed by an assortment of individuals who might be able to help her understand the woman she will be portraying. Another part of the movie dwells on the relationship between Gracie and Joe which, after 20 years, might have hit a tricky point when the empty-nester scenario is just around the corner.
The persistently presence of piano background music, often intense, sometimes dramatic, but never soothing, is sufficient to convey the director's message to the audience. Is everything the way it seems, or are there intriguing layers if you dig below the surface? There are innuendos aplenty, but no definite answers.
Gracie's history would obviously invite suspicions of whether she is the uncomplicated, simple, contented woman now, approaching her sixties. In one scene, Joe finds her breaking down in tears. The reason turns out to be just that a much-valued order for her catering service is cancelled. Towards the end, when husband and wife are having their domestic discussions, Gracie challenges Joe on who really started "the incident". She went to jail because he was a minor (only 13). But "who was in charge?" Gracie challenged. In no uncertain terms is her conviction (no pun intended) that he seduced her. Does the movie give an answer? Sorry, no.
What about Elizabeth? One may see her only as surrogate for the audience, trying to find "something true, something honest" about this scandal that happened 20 years ago. But it is quite logical, and simpler, to see her as a perfectionist of an actor, trying to understand her subject as best she can before she goes before the camera. She wants to "become Gracie", but what's wrong with that? I am not sure if this can be called "method acting" but it will be something of the sort, anyway. The one time we get tantalizingly close to seeing a "revelation" of Elizabeth is when she is invited to speak to local drama students. The first salvo from a smart-Alex student is "have you played sex scenes?" But, interesting as the talk is, it does not show anything about Elizabeth you don't expect from a profession screen (and occasionally stage) actor.
Joe, consistently minimalistic throughout the movie, is unfortunately not really an enigma either. This is a typical kidult who still hasn't grown up, not under the thumb of parents as in normal cases, but of a wife 23 years older. The poignancy brought out by Melton's superb acting is a highlight in this movie. Watch for the scene with Joe smoking pot with his son on roof top. When he breaks down in tears, it is more than obvious that despite age and appearance, who is really the adult and who is the kid.
"May December" is a clever exercise in style, sustained by three top-notch performances.
Some 20 years ago, 36-year-old married woman Gracie (Julianne Moore) had sex with a 13-year-old boy Joe (Charles Melton), got convicted for child rape and, in prison, gave birth to a girl fathered by Joe. After serving her term, she married Joe, and they had a pair of twins. The family of five carries on, at present, as a perfectly normal, happy middle-class family, living in a large waterfront house in Savannah.
While the incident, needless to say, was met with considerable public indignation, it was after all two decades ago. To Gracie, it is as if it had never happened. The only thing slightly out of the ordinary about her marriage, to Gracie, is the age and ethnic differences (Joe is half-Korean, in fact both the character and the actor), neither of which should cause even a raise in eyebrows.
The story really starts when someone decides to make a movie out of Gracie's story. Elizabeth (Natalie Portman) who has been cast to portray Gracie, visits them in the aforementioned idyllic Savannah neighborhood.
While nothing seems to be out of the ordinary, there are a couple of suggestive hints in the opening scenes. The house is bubbling with activities, barbecuing and swimming outside (with screaming kids) and kitchen preparations inside. Gracie goes to the fridge, opens it. For a split second, the expression on her face brings flashes of a scene in Stephen King's "It", when somebody opens the fridge and sees Stanley Uris's severed head inside. What Gracie mumbles, however, is not quite as exciting "There aren't enough hot dogs". But why such exaggeration? I think that is to serve notice that while "May December" is billed as comedy (indeed included in that category in the Golden Globe best picture nomination), don't expect an easy ride.
After Elizabeth's arrival and getting acquainted with the family, there is nothing unusual about an actor's effort in understanding the protagonist she is going to portray. Yet, consider this first exchange at the door of the house where the two women first meet. Elizabeth says "oh, I though you would be taller". Nothing unusual in that. Gracie replies "We are basically the same size". Nothing unusual. Without missing a beat comes Elizabeth's rejoinder "We are basically the same". Suggestive.
As characters interact, morsels of their personality and experiences, when revealed, serve to mystify, rather than clarify. When the two women chat casually while working on some floral arrangements, Gracie intimates that she does not dwell on the past. Elizabeth acknowledges that she is exactly the opposite.
There is no convoluted plot. Not even a plot in the conventional sense, you may say. Part of the movie runs like Elizabeth's investigation procedurals, setting up meetings and talking to various people, starting with Gracie's ex-husband, followed by an assortment of individuals who might be able to help her understand the woman she will be portraying. Another part of the movie dwells on the relationship between Gracie and Joe which, after 20 years, might have hit a tricky point when the empty-nester scenario is just around the corner.
The persistently presence of piano background music, often intense, sometimes dramatic, but never soothing, is sufficient to convey the director's message to the audience. Is everything the way it seems, or are there intriguing layers if you dig below the surface? There are innuendos aplenty, but no definite answers.
Gracie's history would obviously invite suspicions of whether she is the uncomplicated, simple, contented woman now, approaching her sixties. In one scene, Joe finds her breaking down in tears. The reason turns out to be just that a much-valued order for her catering service is cancelled. Towards the end, when husband and wife are having their domestic discussions, Gracie challenges Joe on who really started "the incident". She went to jail because he was a minor (only 13). But "who was in charge?" Gracie challenged. In no uncertain terms is her conviction (no pun intended) that he seduced her. Does the movie give an answer? Sorry, no.
What about Elizabeth? One may see her only as surrogate for the audience, trying to find "something true, something honest" about this scandal that happened 20 years ago. But it is quite logical, and simpler, to see her as a perfectionist of an actor, trying to understand her subject as best she can before she goes before the camera. She wants to "become Gracie", but what's wrong with that? I am not sure if this can be called "method acting" but it will be something of the sort, anyway. The one time we get tantalizingly close to seeing a "revelation" of Elizabeth is when she is invited to speak to local drama students. The first salvo from a smart-Alex student is "have you played sex scenes?" But, interesting as the talk is, it does not show anything about Elizabeth you don't expect from a profession screen (and occasionally stage) actor.
Joe, consistently minimalistic throughout the movie, is unfortunately not really an enigma either. This is a typical kidult who still hasn't grown up, not under the thumb of parents as in normal cases, but of a wife 23 years older. The poignancy brought out by Melton's superb acting is a highlight in this movie. Watch for the scene with Joe smoking pot with his son on roof top. When he breaks down in tears, it is more than obvious that despite age and appearance, who is really the adult and who is the kid.
"May December" is a clever exercise in style, sustained by three top-notch performances.