Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA woman attempts to realize the dreams she never knew she had.A woman attempts to realize the dreams she never knew she had.A woman attempts to realize the dreams she never knew she had.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires au total
Dana Chaifetz
- Susan
- (as Dannah Chaifetz)
Kelly Hill
- Ms. Hensen
- (as Kelley Hill)
Avis à la une
Lili Taylor stars in this anything-is-possible story about a Hoboken housewife and mother of two in her late-thirties who has very little education but is actually a closet physics nut; she kicks her husband out of the house when he makes fun of her ambition, eventually becoming a computer scientist. Unreleased theatrical drama made the film festival rounds in 2002 but never picked up a distributor; when it was finally released on DVD by gay-based Here!, it was misleadingly marketed as a lesbian-themed chick-flick. Written by Bob Gosse (who also directed) and Wendy Hammond (from her play), the film has similar attributes to "Good Will Hunting", yet our protagonist is an original, appealing character. 'Ordinary' at first glance, this lady is a little naïve but also complicated, determined and hopeful. Taylor is exceptionally confident in this role and pulls off some tricky dramatic moments with grace. As her neighbor and best friend, Courtney Love is also very natural and appealing, and Spalding Gray does nice, low-key work as a teacher. The narrative tends to stumble when the writers overreach for an effect (such as a confusing early scene wherein Julie's angry son cusses out mom's friend). There is light lesbian affection between Taylor and Love, but this is handled unobtrusively in the story, without cynicism or sensationalism; more importantly, what the intimacy resolves (and what it soon leads to) is heartbreaking without being melodramatic. **1/2 from ****
While there are some genuine moments between the characters portrayed by Lili Taylor and Courtney Love, the film as a whole is an unbelievable clunker that rings terribly false. The previously unrecognized scientific talent of the Taylor character is an unnecessary plot device; the story would be much more interesting if she was an average working-class woman seeking to continue her education. The characters, especially her husband, are portrayed as two-dimensional cliches. With a more talented director at the helm, this film might have been a good one, but Julie Johnson lacks the nuance and subtlety that make a film compelling.
Let's get the important stuff out of the way first: there are no scenes of Courtney and Lili gobbling each other up. Yeah, that's a disappointment, but so it goes.
The performances were excellent, and somewhat believable, except for the sudden emergence of an older, uneducated suburban housewife as a scientific prodigy. Yeah, that happens all the time. That was the only plot device that didn't fly, but it really ruins the rest of the movie. You just can't see this woman suddenly discovering she is a genius, a lesbian, and her independence all at the same time.
She suddenly discovers she's a lesbian? Sure, why not. That one works. But why does it have to involve her tossing her husband out on the street? How is it his fault? Lesbians don't have any feelings for people who have supported and loved them? She suddenly discovers she's in love with her best friend. Yeah, that one works, too. It throws an interesting twist into the film and Courtney Love delivers one of her better performances here.
She suddenly discovers she's a genius? This is where it breaks down. She never showed the slightest sign of intelligence before, but now she's a prodigy. Unfortunately for her husband, she's not smart enough to treat him with any dignity or respect, but she's smart enough to write cryptographic algorithms even though she never graduated high school. If it wasn't for this lame, unnecessary and ignorant part of the movie, I'd say it was a great independent and lesbian film.
Julie Johnson could have been the average housewife who discovers she's a lesbian and is in love with her best friend. That would have made a good film. But she's suddenly a spiteful genius, and that doesn't make a good film. Too bad.
The performances were excellent, and somewhat believable, except for the sudden emergence of an older, uneducated suburban housewife as a scientific prodigy. Yeah, that happens all the time. That was the only plot device that didn't fly, but it really ruins the rest of the movie. You just can't see this woman suddenly discovering she is a genius, a lesbian, and her independence all at the same time.
She suddenly discovers she's a lesbian? Sure, why not. That one works. But why does it have to involve her tossing her husband out on the street? How is it his fault? Lesbians don't have any feelings for people who have supported and loved them? She suddenly discovers she's in love with her best friend. Yeah, that one works, too. It throws an interesting twist into the film and Courtney Love delivers one of her better performances here.
She suddenly discovers she's a genius? This is where it breaks down. She never showed the slightest sign of intelligence before, but now she's a prodigy. Unfortunately for her husband, she's not smart enough to treat him with any dignity or respect, but she's smart enough to write cryptographic algorithms even though she never graduated high school. If it wasn't for this lame, unnecessary and ignorant part of the movie, I'd say it was a great independent and lesbian film.
Julie Johnson could have been the average housewife who discovers she's a lesbian and is in love with her best friend. That would have made a good film. But she's suddenly a spiteful genius, and that doesn't make a good film. Too bad.
7lo-1
The play was incredible. The movie wasn't as good, but still it was good.
The director/producers should have stayed closer to the original play, and its writing. There were times when Ms. Hammond's voice belted out--and the audience was captivated. Other times, one could tell that the director's weak writing was diluting the strength of the production.
Give the audience some credit. If the production is well done, they can follow intelligent writing. The writing did not need to be compromised to go to a movie format.
The director/producers should have stayed closer to the original play, and its writing. There were times when Ms. Hammond's voice belted out--and the audience was captivated. Other times, one could tell that the director's weak writing was diluting the strength of the production.
Give the audience some credit. If the production is well done, they can follow intelligent writing. The writing did not need to be compromised to go to a movie format.
i loved lili taylor in this movie. and although there were some scenes that were truly well done, engaging and enjoyable, i have to agree with the other comments so far: something was missing, something just wasn´t right. it seems to me that someone wasn´t totally sure what the movie was to be about, what its main focus should be. julie´s suddenly discovered academic talents somehow ring false, there is nothing here that would explain them or make them believable. i was expecting an upbeat movie, and although the direction the story took in the end made sense, it wasn´t exactly satisfying. for anyone who wants to see rebelling housewives or who just wants to see lili taylor and courtney love ACT (or kiss each other), i would recommend this one though.
Le saviez-vous
- Citations
Lisa Johnson: Mom, is it true? Is everything that people are saying about you and Claire true?
Julie Johnson: We love each other. That's true.
Lisa Johnson: As what?
Julie Johnson: As... lovers.
- Bandes originalesShe's Gone
Written and Performed by Liz Phair
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Julie Johnson?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Джули Джонсон
- Lieux de tournage
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant