batik_jenny

I've grown older, I've grown sedated - this was the first time in I don't remember how long that a movie really made me FEEL so much. The music, the camera-work, the speeches, the feeling of just wanting to c h a n g e so much! I got completely wrapped up in it, especially, like someone else wrote, since the state of the world is at it is today; it makes this movie feel more accurate than ever! Why, oh why, aren't there revolutionaries like these on the streets and in the universities of today? One thing though. The movie very accurately portrays women of this time and this movement, and by that I mean they are portrayed either as sexual objects, passive jewelry for the revolutionaries (men) to lean on in their "headquarter" (in this case the dean's office)or as frail and beautiful little birds the men have to care for. It is true that this is how women of the movement were treated - as someone who could make coffee whilst the men drew up revolutionary plans of how to overthrow the government - that is until women fought back and started their own revolution. I just wish that when revolution comes next time, there will be no sexism in its lines...

All praise goes to Jonathan Jackson who saves this sticky sentimental crap movie. The screen lights up whenever Jackson enters as Beth and Pat Cappadora's oldest son Vincent. You can feel the torment in that adolescent body. Why the heck is it so hard for his parent to understand him?

If you like the Vincent character I can recommend you to read the book by Jacquelyn Mitchard. It's about as sentimental as the movie (if not more) but interesting in the way that it is told through a shared view, with both Beth and Vincent narrating the story. In the book we learn a lot more about Vincent and his life, why he became who he is and what he thinks and feel about the whole situation. Most of the time seen from Vincent's view is spent at his psychiatrist Tom, a character they completely cut out of the movie. That's too bad, because that's where all the action really takes place. Vincent is a really messed up kid, and the scenes between him and Tom are both funny and thoughtful.

In the book Vincent also suffers from panic attacks, something experienced by many teens and that could have been used in the movie as a good identification issue. Sadly, that was cut out too. Basically, what they have done is taken what is in the book a multilayered and very interesting character, and turned him one-dimensional and less inspiring. What we can be thankful for is Jonathan Jackson who I think does a great job with the little he is given. Ryan Merriman, who plays the lost son Ben/Sam is also very good.

But otherwise this movie seems like a made-for-TV-sleeze-thing and I can't stand the bad acting put up by the adults. Michelle Pfeiffer can be really good in roles that are more toned down than this one and her overacting everything is annoying. Treat Williams is mostly just vacant. Whoopi Goldberg on the other side does a fine job as a minority within the majority: a black, lesbian cop that befriends the family. Basically: you can get a lot out of reading the book if you just skip the parts about Beth.