Eating

There are 30 minutes of this film that will fascinate you, hold you spellbound, totally engage your empathy and emotions.

Unfortunately, these moments are scattered randomly in a movie that's 110 minutes long, and the remaining 80 minutes leave a lot to be desired, with stilted, rushed dialog that almost seems like it's being read from cue cards, characters who come and go so quickly that even when what they say touches you, no lasting sense of connection is forged.

The big issue is the structure itself: 'Martine' is shooting a documentary about the relationship between women and food at her friend's birthday party, giving the characters a chance to deliver monologues straight to the camera that are often fascinating, even riveting. But there are too many people, too many words, too much going on between the characters outside what the documentary camera sees. This could easily have been addressed by giving Martine an assistant, someone to actually work the camera and spy on the party's goings on when Martine is elsewhere. But without that convention, we are often uncertain what is documentary and what is 'real' life.

There is so much here that doesn't matter-- why a triple birthday, for women turning 30, 40 and 50 when the issues of age and aging are largely in the back ground? Why so many people? Why so many conflicts and love stories when the central love affair between women and food is far more interesting than any of the interpersonal stuff?

Several fine performances here-- notably Frances Bergen and Beth Grant, though Mary Crosby at her radiant best is given little to do.

Worth seeing for the 30 good minutes, but sadly disappointing in so many ways... ultimately, it's a man putting words in women's mouths about what it's like to be a woman, and it's certainly not a comedy. I hope a woman film maker chooses to make the actual documentary at the center of this movie-- that's a film I'd love to see.

I actually waited years to watch this film. What a disappointment. It should have been 5 minutes long and it must have had an elementary teacher's budget because the acting is well...bad. It's so bad, you can't tell if it's scripted or not. Nelly Alard as Martine, the French guest filming all this whining, is the only actual talent among the bunch. I'm not even going to count Frances Bergen. She shouldn't even be there. Why in the world did she agree to do this? The point that women are obsessed with food and eating (yes, they're two different things) and obsessed with every square inch of our bodies, and our mothers affect how we feel about food, eating, and every square inch of our bodies, is established and then beaten to death multiple times. I wouldn't have been able to abide long with any of these women. I wanted to slap them. I forced myself to watch it to the end and this is the only film review I've ever posted, I think. But then I'm really hungry right now so I may have and just forgotten.

Too many actresses - it was very confusing being inside Henry Jaglom's head. This mockumentary style movie obsesses on food and women all intertwined with sexuality.

Even Frances Bergen who plays a type of baffled sane matriarch looks as if she has had her problems with food in the past but in this movie she is astonished at the obsessive compulsive behaviour around food at this party she attends for her daughter's fortieth birthday.

Maybe she doesn't get out much in the shallow body-and-youth culture that is California. I would say that Henry was deliberate in keeping this movie without any depth. He just stockpiled it with far too many women (I lost track, they all looked vaguely alike and whined in the same sad key).

Go read a book, ladies, visit an art gallery, recite poetry, read for the blind. Far too much time on your hands. Get interesting. Maybe that was the point?

7 out of 10 for its daring - though it had to be a flop at the box-office.

I saw this for the first time last night, and that is all I can say...wow. This is an incredible symphony of an emotional movie. The fact that I, too, have a history of an eating disorder really brought out my emotions for it (though some who suffer from this disease may find it triggering-I found it cathartic). The sympathy shown for the characters, especially Nelly Alard, is nothing short of extraordinary. It's even more incredible to me when you consider that it was made by a man.

There isn't a whole lot in the way of plot, but that actually works to the movie's advantage, allowing it to focus on the characters, who drive the film. At times it is hard to follow what's going on, but that makes it all the more real to me-it gives the feeling of actually being at the party being shown.

Some may find Henry Jaglom's style to be on the indulgent side, but given the subject matter, (for me anyway) it was appropriate here. I was unfamiliar with most of his body of work before seeing this (I had only seen his segment in "Movie Madness", which he later disowned), but my interest is now piqued and I will seek out more of his films if I can.

Travesties like this give indie film a bad name.

Jagblom had his cast improvise most of the material, with a rough scripted story structure. Sometimes this works; here, it's a dismal failure.

The riffing about weight gets old fast, and is laughably preposterous to anyone who isn't an LA actress (i.e., most of his cast). Jagblom's "woman-sensitive" directing is almost immediately exposed as lecherous posturing, as his beautiful star is trotted out topless for no reason within the first 15 mins. Nice rack, Henry, but what about the movie?!?

Worst of all, it's just horribly boring. None of the characters seem worth following, and the film does a terrible job focusing on a few so you can get a toehold on some drama. For comparison, I enjoy female-friendly films like "Mystic Pizza," "Moonstruck" and "Clueless." I love foreign films. I would've walked out on "Eating", but sadly it was a rental.

Central conflict? Woman vs. pastry. Cinematography? Bland and undistinguished. Best use for Eating? Doorstop.