Happy-Go-Lucky

[Kurosawa Fan]

Sally Hawkins was better than Happy-Go-Lucky. She was wonderful, and I really hope she gets a nomination. The movie itself was good, nothing more. It was very pleasant and fun, but not exactly deep, and I'm a bit conflicted on Poppy herself, which means I'm basically conflicted on the theme of the film. She's certainly a happy person, and the most basic message of the film to strive for happiness and spend time trying to make those around us feel happier in their lives is, obviously, a great message. But I'm not sure that Poppy was working in the best interest of those around her, and instead was only thinking of herself. This was especially evident with Scott, the driving instructor. Anyway, I'm still letting things settle. I enjoyed it, but wasn't really impressed by anything other than Hawkins.

[Amnesiac]

Sally Hawkins was better than Happy-Go-Lucky. She was wonderful, and I really hope she gets a nomination. The movie itself was good, nothing more. It was very pleasant and fun, but not exactly deep, and I'm a bit conflicted on Poppy herself, which means I'm basically conflicted on the theme of the film. She's certainly a happy person, and the most basic message of the film to strive for happiness and spend time trying to make those around us feel happier in their lives is, obviously, a great message. But I'm not sure that Poppy was working in the best interest of those around her, and instead was only thinking of herself.

I think the film does confront these kind of complexities. The dangers of unchecked happiness, or to use a less awkward phrase, the harmful ways we unknowingly affect others. Also, the difficulty inherent in establishing your own functional conception of happiness as well as the impossibility of ever being able to bring other people into that bubble of optimism.

Her relationship with her Driver's Ed teacher, Scott, seemed to best elucidate this sort of idea. Despite Poppy's frivolous, happy-go-lucky deportment... it can't be infectious or productive. The world is too complex to match her peppy optimism and frivolous attitude. The fact that she eventually has to turn away from this distraught, angry man is evidence of the fact. She can't help him. And in a way, she's learned a valuable lesson about unchecked happiness and what it can do to people who are incapable of meeting you on your emotional level. After all, she's incapable of helping him. For all of her cheeriness, the harsh reality is that the world may never level up with her. There's even a scene of contemplation following the incident with Scott, perhaps suggesting that Poppy is becoming aware that she can't bring everyone onto her plane of carefree joy.

Also, I noticed that her boyfriend seemed to represent a more subdued and pragmatic world. And the necessity of that pragmatism. Note how Leigh shot their different apartment buildings. Hers is a scattered mess, colorful and unkempt. Meanwhile, the establishing shot, and interior, of his is pretty much immaculate and well structured. Furthermore, during the scene with the abused student, the shot-reverse-shot highlights his stern seriousness contrasted against her vibrant optimism. This seemed to suggest that you need this coalescing of pragmatism and happiness. The world is too complex for merely one or the other — or in this case, too much of the other. I may be reading into it too much, but I found Poppy and Tim's relationship to be emblematic of that very fact. Two worlds and sensibilities colliding. Their effective handling of the student's problem seemed to suggest that you can't confront the world on loud, ostentatious happiness alone.

And in regards to 'unhappy' characters such as Scott, the student and even the hobo, I think it indicates that while Poppy may have a working strategy for life... that is, she may have found that elusive thing called 'happiness'... she can't expect the rest of the world to so easily follow suit. But, as the end of the film suggests, she's going to try anyway... because it's better than doing nothing. Or, essentially, what else can you do?

[Kurosawa Fan]

Her relationship with her Driver's Ed teacher, Scott, seemed to best elucidate this sort of idea. Despite Poppy's frivolous, happy-go-lucky deportment... it can't be infectious or productive. The world is too complex to match her peppy optimism and frivolous attitude. The fact that she eventually has to turn away from this distraught, angry man is evidence of the fact. She can't help him. And in a way, she's learned a valuable lesson about unchecked happiness and what it can do to people who are incapable of meeting you on your emotional level. After all, she's incapable of helping him. For all of her cheeriness, the harsh reality is that the world may never level up with her. There's even a scene of contemplation following the incident with Scott, perhaps suggesting that Poppy is becoming aware that she can't bring everyone onto her plane of carefree joy.

I think you're giving her too much credit. After turning away from him, she hasn't learned much of a lesson. She sits back and takes a breath and obviously contemplates what has just happened, but in the very next scene she's out on the water with her flatmate saying how there's no harm in trying to make everyone around her happy (even though we've just been show that not to be true) and then takes a call from the boyfriend you mention in which they do fun flirting before our fade to black. Those are the words and actions of a woman who has learned a valuable lesson. She's still Poppy at the end of the day, and thus there's no character arc. It didn't sit well with me.

[Amnesiac]

I think you're giving her too much credit. After turning away from him, she hasn't learned much of a lesson. She sits back and takes a breath and obviously contemplates what has just happened, but in the very next scene she's out on the water with her flatmate saying how there's no harm in trying to make everyone around her happy (even though we've just been show that not to be true)

Yeah, but the sense is, it's better than simply giving up. She's wiser, she has a greater appreciation of the myriad emotional complexities inherent in people... and perhaps, she now might be better at infusing those people with happiness. Or more cautious, at least. A little wiser. And, as her relationship with Tim might suggest, more pragmatic. Realistic.

But, I think the film decidedly circumvents a "The world is an emotional mess so why bother?" type of finale for a "Okay, things are more complex than I thought - but it's still worth trying". To me, there's a suggestion of newfound wisdom about the world but also this determination to not give up on it... because that's merely a defeatist sort of attitude. And even less productive than what Poppy was doing throughout the course of the film.

Plus, her flirting with Tim at the end is okay because... well, he's her boyfriend. He's not a potential wild-card like Scott.

[Winston*]

Pretty sure if you look at most people IRL, you'd be hard-pressed to find a defined character arc.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I think it's the line "There's no harm in trying, is there?" that bothers me, because, well, we've just seen that there is harm in trying. As a character, she can be forceful with her personality when it isn't appropriate, and as such she caused major conflict in a person's life. It was an awkward statement to make after such an event.

The flirting thing is fine, of course she can flirt with her boyfriend, but it further established that she's moving on from what happened with Scott and putting it behind her.

And you're right Winston*, not every person or every film has or needs a character arc. This one did.

[Amnesiac]

I think it's the line "There's no harm in trying, is there?" that bothers me, because, well, we've just seen that there is harm in trying.

But perhaps the trying of before will be markedly different from the trying of now... because she's experienced things, learned things, gained wisdom, etc.


It was an awkward statement to make after such an event.

Yeah, Poppy's awkward. :)



but it further established that she's moving on from what happened with Scott and putting it behind her.

Thereby, she has learned the merits of keeping her distance, and checking her overt happiness at the door. At least, when it comes to certain situations. Wisdom. She coming to terms with the fact that she's not some jubilant source of catharsis for all people, and her methods need some reevaluating... as she's just a person with a unique attitude on life that doesn't always gel with others.

[Kurosawa Fan]

But what evidence do you have that she's wiser? Where has she shown that she's learned anything? Was it the montage of her walking back home after the incident with Scott? Because there's nothing between that and the boat ride. I just don't see how you're so confident that she's wiser and won't be the same old Poppy. Seems you're injecting your own hopes into the film rather than taking what's there on the screen.

[Kurosawa Fan]

BTW, it's midnight in my area, and I have work in the morning, so I'm off to bed. Feel free to continue posting and I'll check it and respond when I get to work.

[Amnesiac]

But what evidence do you have that she's wiser? Where has she shown that she's learned anything? Was it the montage of her walking back home after the incident with Scott?

The scene of contemplation and the events she experiences throughout the film suggests this, but does not explicitly state it. That's what I'm going off of.


Seems you're injecting your own hopes into the film rather than taking what's there on the screen.

No, I feel like I'm responding to a suggestion that the film presents... again, that suggestion may be explicitly stated, but it's not refuted either. There actually seems to be a lot that indicates the likelihood of that suggestion.

[Kurosawa Fan]

We're spinning our wheels here, but I never felt like she toned herself down at any point, and there's that last bit of dialogue as well. Those things, to me at least, seem to be refuting your opinion that she's changed. The walk down the street is nice and all, but it's all of 30 seconds of film and immediately after that she seems right back to her usual Poppy.

I'm glad you came away with a more positive outlook than I did. Wish I was on your side of the fence, and perhaps if I see it again my opinion would change. As for now, I just don't see it.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Oh, and I moved this to it's own thread to avoid spoiling people. And because it deserves a thread. Maybe more people will chime in and tell me I'm wrong.

[thefourthwall]

It was a few months ago that I saw this, so I don't have quite as many details at the ready.

While Poppy's encounter with Scott may not have changed her, it changed me. For much of the film, I was bordering on annoyed with Poppy for being so oblivious and naive. But then as we gradually see reality, red in tooth and claw, coming closer to her with her blow-up with Scott as the final encounter and her recommitment to optimism, I realized that her character was not silly and unaware. Rather I now could look back and see that she was choosing to be optimistic, and I agreed with her that I'd rather see that in excess than people (like Scott) who have chosen to be negative.

[Benny Profane]

I saw the film as a test of her untamed happiness, and she won.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Well, if it's a choice between her outlook and Scott's, that's not much of a choice at all. I think just about everyone is on Poppy's side there.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I saw the film as a test of her untamed happiness, and she won.

Sure. This works. I said in my first post that the basic message of the film is about our own happiness, and that's fine. But it also tries to suppose that Poppy is striving to make others happy around her, and I'm not sure that's necessarily true. I think she's fairly oblivious to what makes others happy outside of her immediate friends, and that her pushy, in-your-face demeanor can actually have the opposite effect. That didn't seem to occur to her until Scott, and afterward I didn't get the feeling that she had evolved much after that encounter. A contemplative walk around town doesn't do it for me when you hop in a boat later and claim that doing the things you've been doing all your life doesn't cause others any harm. But that's just me I guess.

Still liked the film though. Just not in love with it.

[Sven]

What I think a lot of people overlook is Scott's clearly delirious psychosis. I don't think they're supposed to be opposed to each other on a thematic scale, because as thefourthwall says, Poppy has her wits about her, Scott does not, and it's hard (not to mention unfair) to compare craziness to lucidity.

At any rate, I agree with your first post, that Hawkins was better than the movie itself. I was slightly disappointed with how conventional it was (the literalness of the driving metaphor was a poor choice, and the film was much too neatly packaged, particularly for a Leigh film), but I laughed a lot and nearly cried. The moment with the homeless man was beautiful. Still, I was in love with Hawkins from scene one. Her attitude beautifully related to my own approach to hardship. Best moment: when she says that she never got to say goodbye to her bicycle.

[thefourthwall]

Well, if it's a choice between her outlook and Scott's, that's not much of a choice at all. I think just about everyone is on Poppy's side there.

And yet everyday, I see people choosing to respond to life with extreme cynicism, rather than even cautious optimism.

[Melville]

I agree with Kurosawa Fan. In general, I don't think the film did a great job of arguing for Poppy's chipper attitude. I'm somewhat biased, in that I find people like Poppy extremely irritating, but I thought the adversity and negativity surrounding Poppy were far too simplistic, making it far too easy to support her happy-go-luckiness. Leigh has crafted other films filled with realistic portrayals of people weighed down and embittered by everyday life, and I think this film would have done better to contrast Poppy with such characters, rather than contrasting her with spittle-covered driving instructors, bitter flamenco dancers, and one-note bitchy sisters. Poppy was the only character given any real nuance. If the film wanted to surround her character with exaggerated and simplified portrayals of negativity, it should have gone all-out with really awful things happening to her, a la Candide but with the opposite conclusion.

[Bosco B Thug]

I think this film would have done better to contrast Poppy with such characters, rather than contrasting her with spittle-covered driving instructors, bitter flamenco dancers, and one-note bitchy sisters.

If the film wanted to surround her character with exaggerated and simplified portrayals of negativity, it should have gone all-out with really awful things happening to her, a la Candide but with the opposite conclusion. I sort of wished these same points during my viewing of the film. For instance, I expected the worst during the homeless man scene. Sad to say, but I was kind of disappointed when nothing came of it. Same with the little boy and his abusive guardian.

In regards to the current discussion, I think I was just content that Scott was given his moment to articulate what puts him off about Poppy. Even if Poppy doesn't really change herself in any way, the fact that she makes herself brush it off in order to "stay true to her outlook on life" does give us that one last tidbit of character exposure with Poppy's character that allows the film to be brought to a conclusion with satisfying vagueness. The role her flatmate plays is important I think as well in that last scene, in that she, as her friend, automatically sides with or at least becomes content with whatever outlook makes Poppy content, without much consideration of Scott or even any morbid curiosity in his problems. Poppy's friends are all very passive with her. Poppy always tells this close knit group of hers about the odious people she encounters, but these friends never seem to push further or be really interested about these people, just what their deal is in regards to Poppy, which struck me as weird.

I loved the film ultimately, so apparently it did something to make me forgive it and make me think that showing the moment when she finally becomes a victim and begins to hate life isn't all that important to the film. I found the film a very full look at not only Poppy but the world around her, which includes all the (a bit plain-spoken) commentary on education and modern liberality, and the very visible motif of multiculturalism. The film is very subtle despite the exaggerated character types, just in its not telling us too much about Scott, or Tim, or not making the pregnant sister a major plot point in any way. Maybe not "subtle," but smartly selective and cohesive with its story element.

[Rowland]

I agree with Kurosawa Fan. In general, I don't think the film did a great job of arguing for Poppy's chipper attitude. I'm somewhat biased, in that I find people like Poppy extremely irritating, but I thought the adversity and negativity surrounding Poppy were far too simplistic, making it far too easy to support her happy-go-luckiness. Leigh has crafted other films filled with realistic portrayals of people weighed down and embittered by everyday life, and I think this film would have done better to contrast Poppy with such characters, rather than contrasting her with spittle-covered driving instructors, bitter flamenco dancers, and one-note bitchy sisters. Poppy was the only character given any real nuance. If the film wanted to surround her character with exaggerated and simplified portrayals of negativity, it should have gone all-out with really awful things happening to her, a la Candide but with the opposite conclusion.So I just saw this, and yeah, what Melville said. Best love-making scene of the year though.

[Amnesiac]

While Poppy's encounter with Scott may not have changed her, it changed me. For much of the film, I was bordering on annoyed with Poppy for being so oblivious and naive. But then as we gradually see reality, red in tooth and claw, coming closer to her with her blow-up with Scott as the final encounter and her recommitment to optimism, I realized that her character was not silly and unaware. Rather I now could look back and see that she was choosing to be optimistic, and I agreed with her that I'd rather see that in excess than people (like Scott) who have chosen to be negative.

Yeah, this sounds about right to me. Except Scott probably didn't want to be negative. I don't think he necessarily chose to be. He just fell into some really bad circumstances that have nudged him into the miserable deportment we find him in.

I think an important point is that Poppy recognizes that her strategy for life isn't the one that is (or even can be) adopted by everyone else. The film offers a variety of different people whose attitudes can be contrasted with, or out-right contradict, Poppy's persona.

Thus, I really think the story is about Poppy becoming more grounded. Coming down from cloud nine, a bit. The pragmatism and professionalism that Tim represents coalesces with Poppy's energetic peppiness. These two worlds can inform each other. In addition to this, Poppy's encounters with the student, the hobo, and Scott all indicate that she is gaining a more intricate understanding of the people around her. This is what leads me to think that the scene of contemplation that Leigh shows after the incident with Scott isn't some frivolous pillow shot... nor is her decision at the end to 'recommit' to her happiness a regressive one. Poppy doesn't seem to be static throughout the film, by the end she is charged with certain valuable experiences. These experiences have given her happiness an important reference point. It's a matter of broadening her narrow and peppy scope of the world.

We don't watch Poppy make the same mistakes over again. And, yes, we don't really get a chance to. But, regardless, there is a strong suggestion that she has a broader and more concrete understanding of the emotional complexities inherent in people. And that seems like an important step forward for her.

In the end, after her experiences, she chooses optimism over defeatist moroseness. I don't think there's anything wrong that.

[Melville]

In the end, after her experiences, she chooses optimism over defeatist moroseness. I don't think there's anything wrong that.
If a movie can't validate my defeatist moroseness, I say nuts to it.

[ledfloyd]

If a movie can't validate my defeatist moroseness, I say nuts to it.
:lol:

i really liked this film, i'd call it one of the best of the year. however it has been a noticably weak year.

i think it's interesting to view this movie in conjunction with naked. in alot of ways they are polar opposites. one is about someone with relentless optimism and the other about someone with relentless pessimism. i think naked works much better. which is odd to think about. why does negativity work better than optimism in film? also, i kind of saw the scenes with the driving instructor as a mirror image of the scenes with the night watchman in naked. in both cases it seems like the main character is being challenged by his opposite. in both cases the main character seems to come out of the situation unchanged.

[Amnesiac]

If a movie can't validate my defeatist moroseness, I say nuts to it.

:)

[Watashi]

This is probably my new favorite movie of the year.

[Watashi]

I don't know how anyone could find Poppy annoying or irrating. All through out the film, I was wondering "why can't a girl like Poppy be in my life?". I loved every nuance and quirky detail about her.

Oh, and Eddie Marson better get nominated for Best Supporting Actor.

[eternity]

I don't know how anyone could find Poppy annoying or irrating. All through out the film, I was wondering "why can't a girl like Poppy be in my life?". I loved every nuance and quirky detail about her.

Oh, and Eddie Marson better get nominated for Best Supporting Actor.
I don't remember if you're one of those who finds Juno annoying, but...

[Watashi]

I loathe Juno with every fiber of my being.

The two films couldn't be more different.

[Sycophant]

I loathe Juno with every fiber of my being.

The two films couldn't be more different.
They don't really belong in the same paragraph.

[balmakboor]

It should be a new law that all threads will contain mention of Juno just so the haters can continue to have something to talk about.

[Sycophant]

I depise the word "haters" above most every word.

[balmakboor]

I depise the word "haters" above most every word.

My most hated word is "cheesy."

In the case of my use of "haters," should I have softened the blow by using, say, "detractors?" Naw, "haters" seems the appropriate word in the case of Juno.

[Sycophant]

My most hated word is "cheesy."

In the case of my use of "haters," should I have softened the blow by using, say, "detractors?" Naw, "haters" seems the appropriate word in the case of Juno.

"Haters" carries a connotation of implied hollow, reactionary posturing. It's a pretty condescending thing to say.

[Sven]

"Haters" carries a connotation of implied hollow, reactionary posturing. It's a pretty condescending thing to say.

This is the connotation I use in my saying "I'm not a hater." Clearly, there are films I would go so far as to say I hate. I'm a passionate dude. But when people say that I hate just to hate, they're calling me a hater, which I really don't think I am.

So rock on!

[balmakboor]

"Haters" carries a connotation of implied hollow, reactionary posturing. It's a pretty condescending thing to say.

I suppose, if you want to think about it that much, you are right. And condescending or not, that's ultimately how I defined the word. I'm not saying any particular person is hollow or posturing, but I would accuse many of doing so.

Juno is an overpraised movie without a mean-spirited bone in its body. Wrong-headed, occasionally. Mean-spirited, never. I found it enjoyable. Some did not.

Those who should be put on trial over Juno -- if anyone -- are not its makers, but those who overpraised it.

[Sycophant]

I suppose, if you want to think about it that much, you are right. And condescending or not, that's ultimately how I defined the word. I'm not saying any particular person is hollow or posturing, but I would accuse many of doing so.

Juno is an overpraised movie without a mean-spirited bone in its body. Wrong-headed, occasionally. Mean-spirited, never. I found it enjoyable. Some did not.

Those who should be put on trial over Juno -- if anyone -- are not its makers, but those who overpraised it.
I don't want this thing to blow up--and do know that I have a lot of respect and interest in your opinions, usually. But I'll remind that it was one of Juno's biggest supporters, eternity, who baited Wats with a mention in this unrelated thread. There are entire well-reasoned pages in the Juno thread about how many of us disliked Juno on its own merits apart from its popularity (though that may have intensified the discussion), and even found some mean-spirited elements in the film distasteful.

Obviously, a difference of opinion is fine. But considering it was only Wats and I in this thread, I can't help but read your response as an accusation of being a shallow hater, your claim to "no particular person."

And If I'm making a bigger deal out of this than I should be, sorry. I've been kind of cranky lately.

[Derek]

Those who should be put on trial over Juno -- if anyone -- are not its makers, but those who overpraised it.

Who are you to say? This implies that reaction of everyone who hated Juno was due to it first being overpraised rather than a natural or a well-thought-out response. I realize it may be difficult for some people to understand this, but the human brain is powerful enough to cognitively differentiate the hype from one's response to the film and to suggest otherwise is to suggest that Juno haters are brain-damaged. So yes, please drop the condescending posturing and keep those prideful thoughts of your ability to reason better than those who disagree with you all to yourself.

And for the record, I saw Juno about a month and a half before it was even in limited release and I hated it then. I had seen two relatively positive reviews of it at the time and was expecting nothing more than mildly charming, pleasant film.

I'm not sure what to make of your "mean bone in its body comment" aside from pointing out that intentionality means nearly jack squat to me when evaluating the value of a film. A film with the best of intentions can still end up being dreadful in my opinion.

[Derek]

And If I'm making a bigger deal out of this than I should be, sorry. I've been kind of cranky lately.

No, you're not overreacting. This notion that people who hate a film that has been "over-praised" can only be doing so in reaction to the hype needs to be put to rest.

[Ezee E]

No, you're not overreacting. This notion that people who hate a film that has been "over-praised" can only be doing so in reaction to the hype needs to be put to rest.
You clearly didn't like Slumdog Millionaire because of its acknowledged accolades.

[Kurosawa Fan]

*sigh*

I created this thread with such high hopes.

[Winston*]

*sigh*

I created this thread with such high hopes.

http://i1.iofferphoto.com/img/item/532/651/31/o_highhopes.jpg

[Kurosawa Fan]

Unintentional puns are the best.

[Derek]

*sigh*

I created this thread with such high hopes.

Don't let 'em take your hope, you.

http://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/2008/04/happygolucky_450x300.jpg

[balmakboor]

But considering it was only Wats and I in this thread, I can't help but read your response as an accusation of being a shallow hater, your claim to "no particular person."

And If I'm making a bigger deal out of this than I should be, sorry. I've been kind of cranky lately.

My claim of "no particular person" was sincere. I couldn't tell you who in particular likes or dislikes any particular film around here. I don't pay that close attention or take notes.

I'm kinda cranky of late too. Must be the Christmas spirit.

I still love Happy-Go-Lucky.

[Sycophant]

I couldn't tell you who in particular likes or dislikes any particular film around here. I don't pay that close attention or take notes.Harsh.

[Sycophant]

*sigh*

I created this thread with such high hopes.

If it makes you feel any better, the creation of the thread actually kind of made me aware of the film. Had you not created it, I probably wouldn't've seen it, which would have been sad indeed.

[Kurosawa Fan]

If it makes you feel any better, the creation of the thread actually kind of made me aware of the film. Had you not created it, I probably wouldn't've seen it, which would have been sad indeed.

That does make me feel better. Thanks.

[eternity]

I'm about an hour in, and Poppy may be one of the most grating, annoying characters in recent memory.

Does she have like, unchecked autism?

[Kurosawa Fan]

I'm about an hour in, and Poppy may be one of the most grating, annoying characters in recent memory.

Does she have like, unchecked autism?

Says the guy who liked Juno.

HIYO!

[Melville]

I'm about an hour in, and Poppy may be one of the most grating, annoying characters in recent memory.

Does she have like, unchecked autism?
Although I think the movie does a bad job of supporting her viewpoint on life, I think it does a really good job of letting us get to know her. By the end, I no longer minded her. That's something I value in art: the way it can force us to examine and try to understand people that we try to avoid in life.

[Sycophant]

While it's not the sole loveable trait of the film by any means, I very much liked it for the way it fleshed out and humanized a take on that insane Kindergarten teacher you occasionally meet who's impossibly cheery and bouncy and flashy. How the hell does she live?

Such a person would be near impossible for me to get along with. But she was realized beautifully.

[Sven]

Although I think the movie does a bad job of supporting her viewpoint on life

That's the great thing about Mike Leigh. I don't think he ever constructs a film around any one single justification or point-of-view. I don't think the film was intended as a defense, and I think it's frequently critical of Poppy.

I loved her to pieces.

[Sycophant]

I loved her to pieces.I should point out that I came to love her greatly, too. Which is the best thing I could possibly say about the film.

I should check out more of this Mike Leigh fellow.

[balmakboor]

Harsh.

What's harsh about it? I'm not saying I don't care about or read your posts and others. I spend roughly 15 minutes a day here. I was being honest. I didn't make my initial Juno related post with anyone in mind -- the one with "haters." I actually meant it as a joke about the way Juno seeps into so many threads and the same sentiments get rehashed.

I guess I failed at my attempt at a joke, to put it mildly.

Of course, if you can tell me what my favorite film is, then I'll be very impressed and apologetic and walk away with egg on my face promising to pay better attention from now on. Hint: I've stated it many times here and at RT.

[Sycophant]

The harshness came from the way it came off contextually. I can't remember your favorite film, though I do have some memory of you making mention of it in the past (though, uh, I do know that you're a fan of Fassbinder, Ozu, and Powell). I do have an overall impression of your taste, however. I suppose I'm a little sensitive lately to the idea of this place becoming a more typically faceless forum and I've been preoccupied with that lately.

But since it was an attempt at a joke, then whatever. 'Sall good.

[Melville]

Of course, if you can tell me what my favorite film is, then I'll be very impressed and apologetic and walk away with egg on my face promising to pay better attention from now on. Hint: I've stated it many times here and at RT.
Slackers?

[balmakboor]

Slackers?

I'm now officially humbled. Slacker it is.

[Melville]

That's the great thing about Mike Leigh. I don't think he ever constructs a film around any one single justification or point-of-view. I don't think the film was intended as a defense, and I think it's frequently critical of Poppy.
But in his other movies we're given a more nuanced world to which the characters respond. In this one, all the problems and people that Poppy faced seemed overly simplified, making her point of view come off as the obviously superior one.


I loved her to pieces.
Maybe I'll try that next time. I'll send one piece to you and one to Watashi.

[Winston*]

Maybe I'll try that next time. I'll send one piece to you and one to Watashi.

*shakes head*

[balmakboor]

I guess I hadn't noticed anything about MC being more faceless lately. I'm sure my only being here in short occasional bursts hasn't contributed to that in any positive way.

I've only participated in one forum that I considered a total family experience though. Right after A.I. came out, I spent almost two years on the Dreamworks forum for the film. Imagine posting over 2500 times about one movie. I loved it and made about two dozen close iFriends.

[Melville]

*shakes head*
Too far?

[Winston*]

Too far?

Too far...into terrible joke land!!!

[Melville]

Too far...into terrible joke land!!!
Hey, I was trying to make a bitter comment to convey my dislike for chipper people. Don't try to relocate it to terrible joke land.

[balmakboor]

In an attempt to make things slightly less faceless on my part, I just started a Season's Greetings thread in Kitchen Sink.

[Watashi]

Mmmm... Poppy.

[Spinal]

This was outstanding. Possibly my new favorite 2008 film. Loved the way that Leigh brought together forces of positivity and negativity together in a way that approached allegory yet still retained his naturalistic sensibilities. Hawkins was every bit as good as advertised. Reminded me of seeing Toni Collette for the first time. Also love the way that the film stays unpredictable by not meeting your expectations. Normally, a film like this would only create a character like Poppy in order to tear her down and expose her naivety. Leigh allows his ultra-optimistic heroine to also be both sexy and capable. She is bright and bubbly, but certainly not a twit. In other words, she is every bit as complex as a real human being. Excellent cast all around. Very funny. Very thoughtful. The feel-good film of the year was directed by Mike Leigh? Didn't see that coming.

[trotchky]

Agreed; I loved the film too.

The homeless guy made me think of a future Johnny from Naked, and the driving teacher an alternate universe version of Leigh himself. The film felt self-critical in a way, or maybe like a dare, which is part of why I liked it so much.

[DavidSeven]

Saw this a while ago, and loved it too. I guess it makes sense that people call this the anti-Naked since I hated that film. Both films paint a pretty dark picture of the outside world, but only Happy-Go-Lucky contrasts that picture with Poppy's view that the world is only as dark as you let it be. Is her positivity a product of naivety or intelligence? You could argue both sides, and that's why I think the substance of the film is so strong.

It's also funny, emotional, superbly acted, and well crafted. Good stuff all around.

[eternity]

I still retain the belief that she is at least partially retarded.

[chrisnu]

I still retain the belief that she is at least partially retarded.
Yeah, no.

[StanleyK]

Good movie, but I think it would have worked better if the driving instructor had been a normal guy instead of a nutcase. It would have been interesting to see at least one regular person exasperated with Poppy's goofiness, because I know I was.