Thursday, August 13, 2009

(500) DAYS OF SUMMER

Perhaps it's unfair to evaluate a film that revolves around and shuffles through the travails and pains of young-adult love just days after the passing of the one and only John Hughes, but that still doesn't shake my confidence in declaring (500) Days of Summer a movie utterly devoid of joy - bittersweet, or otherwise. Irregardless of the emotional aftershocks left lingering from that pop-cultural fissure last week, (500) Days of Summer unravels in rewinds and fast forwards like a heart-felt mix tape sequenced all wrong and out of order. High Fidelity this ain't. Indeed, there appears to be nothing but good intentions among the elements that make up this Zooey Deschanel-as-French-chanteuse vehicle, but are the maker's emotions mixed?

First time feature director Mark Webb kicks off his film with one of those "any similarities to living persons are purely coincidental" disclaimers, only then to turn around and name names in the form of an ex-girlfriend (with an added "fuck you" as punctuation). Sure, it's a joke, but one that instantly reveals the film's structural cracks and cross-wired sentiments as it hits the floor with a gigantic thud. If (500) Days of Summer ultimately wants to be about emotional resolve, release, and rebirth - as it clearly does - then why the negative mojo before we've even seen one single image? Pure nonsense. Personally, I chalk this up to the inexperience of a director who previously had only worked in the short-film form of music video, an arena where visions and archs are connected across much shorter distances.

In fact, that sensibility leaves its fingerprints all over (500) Days of Summer. Ideas are choppy, short-lived, brief, erratic. You'll get no disagreement from me that non-linear filmmaking can be compelling, but what Webb's up to here is a shell game, one that simply enacts the storytelling device of past-present-past time shifting in order to divert attention away from the filmmaking flaws. To lay out the happenings of (500) Days of Summer in sequential fashion would be to plainly reveal the film's vacuousness. Sequences such as the love-locked Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) sliding into a street musical performance after his first lay with Summer (Zooey Deschanel) and an ill-used narrator taking us through a slide show of "the effects of Summer" feel like shampoo commercial fodder, not cinema.

I think it's safe to say that each one of us has loved somebody that never loved us back. Because of that universally shared experience, the dilemmas that Tom and Summer face as friends and lovers is automatically relatable, but what Webb fails to capture through his lens and - more significantly - through the direction of his actors, is any tangible sign of lovesick infatuation. I can hum The Smiths' "There Is A Light That Never Goes Out" to myself right now with those immortal lyrics "and in the darkened underpass/I thought 'oh god, my chance has come at last'/but then a strange fear hit me/and I just couldn't ask" crying off my tongue and be instantly transported to a place of boy/girl swirl, yet Webb chose to waste that epic tune on a silly meet-cute elevator scene. Funny that a guy who's worked on so many music videos has yet to grasp the powerful relationship between song and image.

It also doesn't help that Zooey Deschanel and Joseph Gordon-Levitt have absolutely zero chemistry on screen. As the couple flits around an IKEA together during an early-in-the-relationship day date, Summer whispers to Tom, "this is fun". Really??? It didn't appear to be. You'd think that the # 1 female object of indie-pop desire would have, by now, figured out a constructive way of responding to a boys devoted emotions besides staring straight-forward with blank blue eyes. It's as if Deschanel has experienced a bit of that "Summer effect" herself, cutting career corners with fluttery charm, winking her way to superstardom.

Deschanel was once able to channel her porcelain features and droll persona into strong supporting comedic roles (see The Good Girl and Elf), but as a leading lady, she's simply out of her range. Yes, you're a cute one Zooey, but not near as radiant as an Anna Karina or Brigette Bardot, so you must learn how to act! And before his next feature-length undertaking, Marc Webb must learn how to direct. With such a universal topic, it must have been easy for him to cut corners as well, but if next time around I catch my man molesting the soul out of "I Know It's Over", we're gonna have some serious problems.

25 comments:

Jason Bellamy said...

Damn, dude. Have a bad day before you saw this movie?

I didn't fall hard for (500) Days, but I fell enough. Chemistry? Uh, yeah, I think they do have it. Fun in the IKEA store? Uh, yeah, I was even having fun with them.

Yes, the film has "cross-wired sentiments." That's entirely the point. Yes, if the film played sequentially it wouldn't have the same power. That's entirely the point, too.

This film is all about having a relationship end and not knowing why. It's about how when the person who gets dumped looks back, all he sees are all the things that made him happy, all the things that suggested the relationship could still be going. In a way, Tom will always love Summer, because he was in love with her when she ended it. His memories are of all the reasons they should be together.

Nevertheless, she broke his heart, and for that he can never forgive her. Hence the perfectly pitched disclaimer/jab at the start of the film, which inspired a knowing laugh.

As for Deschanel's performance, it's supposed to be vague. Tom never gets her. Even when he loves her, he never sees inside her. Again, that's the point.

All of this is to say that we agree entirely on what the film is doing. And we disagree entirely on its effect.

Fox said...

Yes, if the film played sequentially it wouldn't have the same power. That's entirely the point, too....

Well, we disagree on your point that the film had any power to begin with. I think it had none... no matter the sequence. I also think that the out-of-order storytelling simply plays as a convenience to cover up dispassionate filmmaking. It serves as a distraction more than an emotional tool to compliment Tom's mixed up state. I never even felt that Tom was so head-over-heels for Summer, even though his dialogue (and that really awful narration) told us so.

As for Deschanel's performance, it's supposed to be vague. Tom never gets her. Even when he loves her, he never sees inside her. Again, that's the point....

I think you're making an excuse for Deschanel here. Yes, Tom never gets her, and Summer never loves him, but she still likes him, thinks "he's interesting", giggles and sleeps with him. Tom may have been overzealous, but he wasn't wrong in thinking that Summer had affections for him. Marc Webb shows us a little glimmer when they're outside the karaoke bar, but I never saw any affective acting from Deschanel beyond that.

Heck, even when Tom is in the know at the end, Deschanel emotes like a rock. I don't think she's a terrible actress, just not a good one, and definitely not who should be playing a character like Summer. I think people like to see her in this kind of role becaue she's pretty... she's nice to look at, but not fun to watch. If Deschanel stuck to comedy, I think her talent could possibly blossom.

Craig said...

Fox, you're putting me in the awkward position of agreeing with Jason. For God's sake, man, think of the consequences.

But seriously. I think "(500) Days" does a remarkable job at conveying a particular male mindset, something I haven't really seen depicted onscreen before: the (comic) tension between over-personalizing a breakup and achieving some healthy distance from it, to where you can move on. The shuffling of the narrative achieves this to a degree (though it's not as randomly out-of-sequence as some reviews are suggesting). But other devices also figure in the mix: the opening disclaimer, for instance, is all about over-personalizing (not to mention dead-on accurate); whereas the omniscient narrator functions crucially to inform us that the movie doesn't share the protagonist's perspective and doesn't expect us to either.

I can see how the preciousness of the enterprise might rub some viewers the wrong way. I wasn't sure myself for a while but the more the movie pulled us out of Tom's point of view (while still empathizing with it) the more it won me over: e.g., his disastrous rebound date, who rightly chastises Tom for his expectations; or the lovely B&W sequence of talking-head interviews with Tom's friends and boss, who each represent archetypal yet varied perspectives on relationships that Tom can't relate to.

To each his own on the overall effect of the movie, opinions on Zooey, et al., but I don't see how it could be said that none of this fits together or is joyless. I felt an abundance of joy in the filmmaking and performances, and in showing us a refreshing glimpse of L.A. that I've also never before seen onscreen. As for comparisons with John Hughes, I liked four or five of his movies too, but talk about a guy who pandered to his audience by asking them to wholeheartedly endorse his characters' often dubious worldviews, and who showed an ugly side in even the sweetest of his films. "(500 Days)" has its tender moments too, but I think it's also made of tougher stuff.

Fox said...

Fox, you're putting me in the awkward position of agreeing with Jason. For God's sake, man, think of the consequences....

Craig, are you aware of the hole you're heading down! :)

But, on your points... I'm reading a lot of personal and emotional reactions (based on past relationships, perhaps) in all of our comments, which I think should be expected from a film like this.

I think your below comment is especially of note:

But other devices also figure in the mix: the opening disclaimer, for instance, is all about over-personalizing (not to mention dead-on accurate); whereas the omniscient narrator functions crucially to inform us that the movie doesn't share the protagonist's perspective and doesn't expect us to either....

I think you make a strong argument for the narration there. And though I still think it feels a bit forced, you've convinced me of the purpose for it. While I was watching, it just felt tagged on, but I think you make a good point.

However, I diagree about the disclaimer. I think it's a huge flub by the filmmakers. As you said, it's "overpersonalized", and so is the movie. Though the experience Tom goes through is universal, I feel that the origins of this film (the script) comes from a very personal place. Because of that, I think the "fuck you" comment betrays the idea that Tom matures in the end.

Lastly, and in risk of pushing you further onto Jason's side (!), I strongly disagree with you on those B&W Super-8 type asides. Those were exactly the kind of add-ons that felt phony to me. It felt like Webb was trying to convince us of an artistry he hasn't yet earned... and I wasn't buying it. Same with the Bergman parodies. Huh?!?! That just felt like name-dropping. To me, these were the moments that not only showed how Webb was still clinging to the music video format, but how he was incorporating ideas just for the sake of incorporating them and not for the sake of the movie.

Jason Bellamy said...

Well, now that Craig agrees with me, I retract everything I said. Only kidding.

Obviously a lot of this is subjective. That disclaimer, for example, got huge laughs at the theater when I saw the movie. (Of course, people also saw Transformers 2, so don't go by that.) But one point to contend here: I'm not so sure that the disclaimer has anything to do with Tom. The idea of the disclaimer comes from the writer of the story in which Tom is a device. One would assume their experiences are mostly the same. But I never read that Tom is the person saying eff-you to Summer in that disclaimer. Follow me?

On Deschanel: I'm not arguing that she's fantastic. She doesn't do anything in the film that impresses me. Instead, I'm arguing that I think the character is supposed to be blank, cold and awkward. If her acting is poor, it results in smart casting, in my opinion. Though I realize this is very subjective territory.

As for whether Tom is head-over-heels... I think he is. However, he never believes in their relationship, and I think that's what you're sensing. Most love stories in the movies equate the two: you love someone, thus you believe you'll be together forever and ever. Tom loves Summer, or maybe I should say he wants to feel it's safe to love her. But the whole tale of their courtship is all about how he's trying to be the person that gets close to her, and even when he realizes he's going places no other guy has gone before, he never feels secure. Thus, should her breaking up with him shock him? Maybe not. But love isn't rational. He wanted her. He clung to every sign that she wanted him, ignoring the signs that things were going bad. He convinced himself as much as possible that their relationship was safe. So he built himself a tower of emotion tall enough that the fall had to hurt.

Anyway, I know I'm not going to convince you on this one. Sounds like you felt like you were on the outside looking in the entire time. But while (500) Days was no Adventureland for me, it worked. And I do think its structure is effective by design, even though it's also a cheap gimmick to make it seem fresh.

Fox said...

But one point to contend here: I'm not so sure that the disclaimer has anything to do with Tom. The idea of the disclaimer comes from the writer of the story in which Tom is a device. One would assume their experiences are mostly the same. But I never read that Tom is the person saying eff-you to Summer in that disclaimer. Follow me?...

Oh, I totally agree. I don't think Tom would say such a thing. Yes, he has that sequence where he retracts the positive things about Summer and replaces them with negative ("her lovely knees" becomes "her knobby knees") but I still wouldn't attach the quote to Tom at all.

And that's why I think the disclaimer is misplaced. The writer jokes about still harboring some negativity to his "Summer", but Tom clearly doesn't do so in the end. I suppose this is a minor quibble for a film that runs 98 minutes, but my original point was that it just got (500) Days of Summer off on the wrong foot.

Very good thoughts and points made by both of you fellas. And Jason, while I may not be convinced by your perspective, your thoughts on the mechanics of Tom's thinking certainly make me reconsider my original thoughts. Good discussion.

Oh, and Jason, it's perfect that you brought up Adventureland because I was trying to work it in to one of my previous comments, but couldn't. Adventureland is definitely the film that hits the right notes in this territory as far as I'm concerned.

P.S. Just admit that you guys like looking at Zooey and fantazing that your were the groom in that over the shoulder shot, and that's why you liked the film!!! :)

Fox said...

SIDE ISSUE:

Did anyone else think that Zooey's crying at The Graduate screening was, um, odd looking?? Maybe Zooey just has a hard time crying on demand, but she was making one of the weirdest cry faces this side of Laura Dern in Blue Velvet.

Related to that, did either one of you - or anyone who reads this - take that scene to mean the the guy Summer ends up marrying was a ex-boyfriend from her past? She tells Tom she just met a guy at the coffee shop, but when I saw her crying at the ending of The Graduate, a light went on in my head about her past. Also, I thought maybe that's why she shuddered at the Ringo Starr album sleeve that Tom showed her (because it reminded her of an ex). Then I thought, "maybe that's why she has a framed notebook paper sketch of Ringo on her desk. Her ex drew it one day!". OR... maybe I'm reaching.

Any thoughts???

P.S. Any girlfriend/boyfriend who thinks "Octopus's Garden" is the best Beatles song really should maybe be dumped. But I do like "Piggies". For real!

Jason Bellamy said...

P.S. Just admit that you guys like looking at Zooey and fantasizing that your were the groom in that over the shoulder shot, and that's why you liked the film!!! :)

Actually, any personal crush on Zooey has reduced over time, and her Summer did nothing to enchant me -- though I believed Tom was enchanted. In other films though, with other actresses, sure, that happens.

As for the crying scene, I didn't notice anything strange about it, which isn't to argue with your description. I'd have to see it again.

As for crying at The Graduate...

No, she cries because she, unlike Tom, reads the scene correctly. It's not a happy ending. She sees the characters for what they are: two scared, broken people who are clinging to one another in a desperate attempt to feel whole, and they are confusing that with love. She knows their relationship is doomed, that there's something missing. She can see the characters on the screen realizing that -- sees the "oh shit, now what?" expressions. And she knows that she can't be with Tom because she doesn't love him completely. As close as they are, she's passing the time with him.

Having said that ... I guess that kind of takes the Ringo thing off the table. But ... she reacts coldly to Tom there, I think, because he's using the same old gimmicks that used to make her laugh, trying to recreate the magic of their relationship (actually, kind of like what happens in Eternal Sunshine when Patrick tries to become Joel). But she's over him. Over their jokes. Over their flirtations. And so now what used to inspire playful arguing seems like a lazy and pathetic gesture that offends her. She's genuinely unhappy and he doesn't see it, or won't let him see it.

That's the way I read it. When she says she just met the guy she marries, I believed that.

Craig said...

The disclaimer (which, not to split hairs, actually ends with "Bitch" rather than "Fuck you") got a big laugh in my theater as well. I laughed too, mostly at the chutzpah of it, yet I think it carries a deeper meaning by the end. I don't see it as a betrayal of Tom's maturity because I'm not sure he's meant to "mature," at least not in the traditional rom-com way, where the hero renounces his selfish ways before getting the girl and the money anyway. It's the kind of growth that moves forward while still acknowledging the emotional baggage that people carry. That's why the final punchline is so great: at first I thought it was affirming the "Fate" argument, but Gordon-Leavitt's expression is so subliminally hilarious in retrospect that I think it's really saying, "Here we go again."

The Bergman and Truffaut spoofs struck me as exactly the kind of pretensions that a guy like Tom would indulge in post-breakup. Not that their films are by nature pretentious; I'm talking about how Tom perceives them entirely through the context of his own limited experience. (Like a college student who notes in an essay, "This book reminds me of me.") In the Super-8s, I was moved most of all by Clark Gregg's monologue about his wife. He's always cast as such scumbags, it's wonderful to see him in a role like this.

Finally, to answer your questions: a) I didn't find Zooey's crying odd, I was moved by that scene; and b) I got the impression she had met somebody brand new, totally at random. Also, much as I like Zooey, she's not the kind of girl I'd want to marry. That's why I consider the ending to be a happy one.

Fox said...

It's not a happy ending. She sees the characters for what they are: two scared, broken people who are clinging to one another in a desperate attempt to feel whole, and they are confusing that with love. She knows their relationship is doomed, that there's something missing. She can see the characters on the screen realizing that -- sees the "oh shit, now what?" expressions....

Jason-

Interesting comment, because I half agree with your thoughts on that ending of The Graduate and half disagree.

I fully agree that the ending isn't "happy" and that both Benjamin and Elaine are "scared", but I've never seen them as "broken" or "doomed" at all. I think Elaine is feeling some trepidation for sure, but I think there is also relief in her face and equally so (more so!) in Benjamin's. Again, this is subjective, and that's why I find our two interpretations fascinating.

But if Summer is indeed crying because The Graduate has opened her eyes to the fact that she and Tom are through (if that was Webb's intention), then I find that to be pretty trite in retrospect.

Fox said...

The disclaimer (which, not to split hairs, actually ends with "Bitch" rather than "Fuck you") got a big laugh in my theater as well....

Craig-

Wow, well, you must have been watching the PG version that the studio rolled out, b/c mine definitely said "fuck you". Just kidding... thanks for the clear-up.

The ending does definitely have that "here we go again" vibe to it since the day counter scrolls back to "(1)", but I still see Tom as somebody who has matured. In other words, the "(1)" could just as easily mean it's a clean slate now without the weight of Summer obsession around his ankles.

The Bergman and Truffaut spoofs struck me as exactly the kind of pretensions that a guy like Tom would indulge in post-breakup. Not that their films are by nature pretentious; I'm talking about how Tom perceives them entirely through the context of his own limited experience. (Like a college student who notes in an essay, "This book reminds me of me.")...

Eh... perhaps, and I like the argument, but the parodies seem like really bizarre reference points for a guy to be reaching for in a time of young love. Persona and The Seventh Seal?? I mean, I guess it's kind of cute that he's playing chess with cupid in instead of death, but I still read all of that as Webb being selfishly showy.

Craig said...

Eh... perhaps, and I like the argument, but the parodies seem like really bizarre reference points for a guy to be reaching for in a time of young love. Persona and The Seventh Seal?? I mean, I guess it's kind of cute that he's playing chess with cupid in instead of death, but I still read all of that as Webb being selfishly showy.

Personally, I found it refreshing to see a movie where the characters actually go to movies and talk about them and are affected by them, rather than watching a film by a naval-gazing auteur reminding us he's seen Kubrick or Hitchcock by how he stages a scene. I think if Webb were truly being showoffy he would have paid homage to the climax of "The Graduate" by having Tom burst in on Summer's wedding and whisk her away or else be humiliated as an ironic counterpoint -- which is where I thought the movie was going.

And yet --

I fully agree that the ending isn't "happy" and that both Benjamin and Elaine are "scared", but I've never seen them as "broken" or "doomed" at all. I think Elaine is feeling some trepidation for sure, but I think there is also relief in her face and equally so (more so!) in Benjamin's. Again, this is subjective, and that's why I find our two interpretations fascinating.

-- I completely agree with you here. The pessimistic interpretation is really Mike Nichols's view ("I was saying Ben and Elaine would end up like their parents," he has repeatedly said), which probably explains why it's now regarded as orthodoxy. But I'm with you that their faces convey waves of emotion that are far too complex for a simplistic interpretation one way or another. That doesn't ruin Summer's reaction for me, though. Even if it's something the movie endorses (and the narrator's comments would suggest it does), I think it's an extreme viewpoint that balances Tom's rose-colored glasses at the other end of the spectrum. I see Ben and Elaine's fate as open-ended, and Tom and Summer's are too.

I hope this finally convinces you that this is the greatest movie ever made.

Craig said...

naval-gazing auteur

Um, I meant "navel," as in lint, not "naval," as in ships.

Jason Bellamy said...

Well, it's on my short list of greatest films. Oh, wait, we're not just talking about The Graduate.

On that film though, I do want to say: I agree with both of you that there is a mixture of emotions at the end, which is why the scene is so fantastic. I think it would be misreading the film to call it a pure happy ending, because then you're missing the fear -- so that was Tom's misreading of the film as a child. To see only doom, well, at least then you're noticing the subtext, but that's probably not correct either, as both of you have noted.

It's ambiguous, and I recognize that. I was writing from the perspective of how Summer sees it, so I was probably a little strong. As for Nichols ... don't you hate it when filmmakers say shit like that? It confuses people and makes them think that intent erases ambiguity.

Craig said...

On that film though, I do want to say: I agree with both of you that there is a mixture of emotions at the end, which is why the scene is so fantastic. I think it would be misreading the film to call it a pure happy ending, because then you're missing the fear -- so that was Tom's misreading of the film as a child. To see only doom, well, at least then you're noticing the subtext, but that's probably not correct either, as both of you have noted.

I think this hits the mark.

As for Nichols ... don't you hate it when filmmakers say shit like that? It confuses people and makes them think that intent erases ambiguity.

My guess is Nichols was reacting to the hippies who embraced the ending as something wonderful (anti-parent, anti-church, pro-open-road) and tied their counterculture bandwagon to the back of his bus. Still, I never understood why he thought Ben and Elaine would end up like their parents....I mean, after doing that?

I neglected to mention it earlier, but good call both of you on the comparisons to Adventureland. I think they would make a great double-feature. Each in different ways is the closest I've ever gotten to a time-machine back to my youth: Adventureland in texture and flavor; 500 Days in mood and feeling. Both are the best comedies I've seen this year by a mile.

Fox said...

I hope this finally convinces you that this is the greatest movie ever made....

I concede.

And, btw, I think I like "naval gazing" better. I like the image it puts in my mind.

Fox said...

Jason & Craig-

I had no idea Nichols had said the ending was to be read in a specific way. Don't waste time doing it, but if you could post the quote - or at least point me in the direction of him saying it - I would love to see it.

I guess I'm fine with a director saying that a moment in a film - or a film in general - should be read in a specific way, AS LONG as he or she doesn't shrug off his or her viewers for disagreeing with them.

Also, even though a director tells us a that scene is about this or that, doesn't mean that he or she did a good job of communicating that to us. (That's not directed at you guys, but just a spray out there to all the directors who read my blog... y'know.)

Craig said...

I had no idea Nichols had said the ending was to be read in a specific way. Don't waste time doing it, but if you could post the quote - or at least point me in the direction of him saying it - I would love to see it.

This isn't the book where I remember reading that, but it's in there too. The author alludes it may be Nichols joking, but I seem to remember him saying the same thing on his DVD commentary track (with Steven Soderbergh) at the end of the movie.

Anonymous said...

I just came across this while googling the movie and I feel both that I'm too late to the party and eavesdropping in a conversation between a couple of friends, but I also thought, as one of you hypothesized, that Summer actually marries an ex-boyfriend and not just a random guy. It made sense to me since she points out during the karaoke party that she's okay being alone and then tells Tom that she doesn't want a serious relationship. Also, her aversion to calling him her "boyfriend" and emphasizing the fact that they were "just friends" to her, made me believe that she was waiting for someone from her past. Maybe I'm reaching, but since I'm a girl I'm used to thinking that men are the ones who are unsure about what they really want and thus just go along for the ride until it gets to be too much. This being said, I thought the movie did a bit of role reversal and so this resulted in my mom telling me that I was Tom and so I responded that my 500 days of ___ were over and that I was waiting for my Autumn.

I enjoyed reading your discussion, and I'm making a mental note to rent The Graduate since I've committed sacrilege and have never actually seen it.

Tim said...

Um, it looks like you are all missing the point of 500 days. Sure Tom is an oversentimentalising romantic, but Summer is not some sort of realist. She is a love-phobic. She is hitting on him a lot at the start of things, i am amazed that few other people can see this. And there's that business of Tom feeling her walls coming down, the girl is repressed and negative about love, even as she is in it. This character is very complicated, sorry if it didn't come across that way, but it was clear to me. So I don't think she broke his heart so much as perplexed him, leading him to pore over the details to figure it out.
I have seen a lot of movies in my 54 years, and this is one of the best on the subject. They are both in love, she just can't handle it. I also don't think Zooey is all that hot, and that's deliberate, she is not an impossible girl for him to have. I will end with a phrase, Borderline Personality Disorder, read about that and you will understand Summer, and why Tom is so messed up by her, for a while.

Ayudante TLP said...

Tim, you are surtain correct, my ex-girlfriend has BDP , I fel in love her at first sight , later on she told me that happened to her the same with me, but living with a person with BDP is almost impossible, they're like childs and they love and hate at the same time, most of them don't even know they have this problem. 500 days of Summer movie represents the universe of a BDP person brilliantly.

Tim said...

thank you Ayudante, glad someone got the point. As I say, you have to experience a love affair with a Borderline to get the point of the movie, it's made very clear with the cutting off of what she loved, her hair, that she is scared of love and loss.
BPD's are known for falling for people at a distance, and then setting up situations so it looks like it is the other who is making the moves. This is sometimes called stalking, or erotomania. Summer manipulates all sorts of situations with Tom, like rushing into the lift when she sees him alone in it. And the kiss at the copiers, she clearly starts with the big thing for him, he only responds to that.
The story really is about Summer, and not Tom's stuff. He is merely reacting to being her target, and trying to figure out why she backed off after being so obviously into him. Enough to preoccupy anyone.

hanum said...

I like this movie a lot, it reminds me of someone. Good.. Good..

Tahsan113 said...

I totally agree with Tim and Ayudante TLP about summer's BPD thing. Living with an BPD is impossible. My ex has BPD too. and i felt like Tom all along. Thanks to the movie which totally nailed it.

Anonymous said...

My outlook on this movie completely changed after falling in love with a woman with strong BPD traits. It is really nice to see that other people were able to see the hidden message too :)
A 'must watch' in the list of young and romantic guys that are prone to put women in a pedestal.