Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA 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.
- Premi
- 2 vittorie totali
Dana Chaifetz
- Susan
- (as Dannah Chaifetz)
Kelly Hill
- Ms. Hensen
- (as Kelley Hill)
Recensioni in evidenza
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.
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 enjoyed this movie! Both actresses were in top form, and both the plot and the script were incredibly realistic (which can be a refreshing break from all of the "out there" Hollywood story lines).
- Briefly, it's about a woman who discovers that she doesn't want to be an uneducated house wife for the rest of her life, so she decides to pursue her dream of going to school. It's quite inspirational.
- I really enjoyed the main actress in six-feet-under. She's very genuine and "real-seeming." Courney-love, despite all the bad press she's received through the years, was superb. She's an excellent actress (and I'm pretty picky).
- Bottomline: If you like indie films, definitely check it out!
Julie Johnson is a harried, blue-collar housewife, living in New Jersey with her husband and children. Julie's bored and overwhelmed, but she has an intense interest in science. She subscribes to science mags, which she keeps hidden from her narrow-minded, domineering husband. Seems that he just can't fathom Julie's interest, in computers and science.
One day, Julie decides that she wants to take the High school Equivilency Exam, so that she can receive her High school diploma. Meanwhile, she also decides to enroll in computer courses at the local community college. Julie even encourages her best friend Claire, to enroll in the computer courses with her. Claire does so mainly to appease Julie, rather than out of any real interest in computers.
Julie's instructors discover that she has an innate talent for math and science. So much so, that they encourage Julie to apply to some elite colleges, after she passes her High school Equivalency Exam. Julie's Neanderthal husband, forbids Julie to enroll in school. She enrolls anyhow, without telling him. After he finds out, he goes ballistic. So does Julie, who boots him out of their home, during a ferocious argument between them.
Inspired by Julie's boldness when she dumps her caveman hubby, Claire runs away from her own stifling spouse. With no other place to go, she winds-up living with Julie and her kids. Claire and Julie gradually deepen their friendship, which evolves into a romantic relationship. The two consummate their romance in Julie's bed one night. Their lesbian relationship, causes Julie and Claire problems with their judgmental neighbors, friends, and Julie's disapproving children.
Claire and Julie have many ups and downs in their relationship. Julie seems to have more invested in it than Claire does. Julie urges Claire to become educated, and Claire resents Julie's insistence that she upgrade her status in society. Claire feels that Julie is just too intellectual, to understand her point of view. The two must decide if their differences can be bridged, in order to salvage their relationship.
Though this film is progressive, in that it depicts a mature lesbian romance between two women, much about the plot-line is rather anachronistic. First of all, though it's 2001, Julie and Claire's spouses act like it's the 1950s. Back then, men could still rule over their wives and kids. It's utterly absurd, that Julie feels the need to hide her science magazines from her husband, like a daughter would hide dirty magazines from her father.
Also, if Julie was so gifted in math and science, why didn't her teachers encourage her when she was still a young student? And why did Julie have to feel so ashamed of being a woman with intellectual interests, in this day and age? These are a few of the things about the overall plot premise, that just don't ad up.
The chemistry between Lili Taylor as Julie, and Courtney Love as Claire, is erotically charged from the get-go. Though she's reluctant initially to have a sexual relationship with Julie, Claire admits to having had the hots for Julie when they were teenagers. Their lovemaking sessions together, are sensual and romantic. Julie and Claire both enjoy their sexual trysts. But their relationship is also bogged-down with guilt, and internalized homophobia.
The best thing about this film, is the spunkiness of Julie. She's determined to pursue her educational goal and lesbian love affair, despite the resistance of those around her. The question is, why did the creators make a movie that is so obviously out-of-step with contemporary society, regarding it's attitudes towards lesbianism, and female empowerment?? If this movie had been made before 1970, it would've been cutting-edge. By today's standards, this film comes off as being very 'dated', regarding lesbians, and women in general.
One day, Julie decides that she wants to take the High school Equivilency Exam, so that she can receive her High school diploma. Meanwhile, she also decides to enroll in computer courses at the local community college. Julie even encourages her best friend Claire, to enroll in the computer courses with her. Claire does so mainly to appease Julie, rather than out of any real interest in computers.
Julie's instructors discover that she has an innate talent for math and science. So much so, that they encourage Julie to apply to some elite colleges, after she passes her High school Equivalency Exam. Julie's Neanderthal husband, forbids Julie to enroll in school. She enrolls anyhow, without telling him. After he finds out, he goes ballistic. So does Julie, who boots him out of their home, during a ferocious argument between them.
Inspired by Julie's boldness when she dumps her caveman hubby, Claire runs away from her own stifling spouse. With no other place to go, she winds-up living with Julie and her kids. Claire and Julie gradually deepen their friendship, which evolves into a romantic relationship. The two consummate their romance in Julie's bed one night. Their lesbian relationship, causes Julie and Claire problems with their judgmental neighbors, friends, and Julie's disapproving children.
Claire and Julie have many ups and downs in their relationship. Julie seems to have more invested in it than Claire does. Julie urges Claire to become educated, and Claire resents Julie's insistence that she upgrade her status in society. Claire feels that Julie is just too intellectual, to understand her point of view. The two must decide if their differences can be bridged, in order to salvage their relationship.
Though this film is progressive, in that it depicts a mature lesbian romance between two women, much about the plot-line is rather anachronistic. First of all, though it's 2001, Julie and Claire's spouses act like it's the 1950s. Back then, men could still rule over their wives and kids. It's utterly absurd, that Julie feels the need to hide her science magazines from her husband, like a daughter would hide dirty magazines from her father.
Also, if Julie was so gifted in math and science, why didn't her teachers encourage her when she was still a young student? And why did Julie have to feel so ashamed of being a woman with intellectual interests, in this day and age? These are a few of the things about the overall plot premise, that just don't ad up.
The chemistry between Lili Taylor as Julie, and Courtney Love as Claire, is erotically charged from the get-go. Though she's reluctant initially to have a sexual relationship with Julie, Claire admits to having had the hots for Julie when they were teenagers. Their lovemaking sessions together, are sensual and romantic. Julie and Claire both enjoy their sexual trysts. But their relationship is also bogged-down with guilt, and internalized homophobia.
The best thing about this film, is the spunkiness of Julie. She's determined to pursue her educational goal and lesbian love affair, despite the resistance of those around her. The question is, why did the creators make a movie that is so obviously out-of-step with contemporary society, regarding it's attitudes towards lesbianism, and female empowerment?? If this movie had been made before 1970, it would've been cutting-edge. By today's standards, this film comes off as being very 'dated', regarding lesbians, and women in general.
10psund1
I loved this movie! I have to admit, I have been in love with Lilli Taylor since "Household Saints". I love all the movies I have seen her in. But this one really was awesome! I am a big fan of Spalding Gray's work also and miss him being here with us. Seeing him on film brought back all the old feelings of awe I have always felt listening to him. The picture of Courtney Love and Lilli Taylor on the cover is what caught my attention and I have to say, they did wonderfully together in this movie. People seem to either love or hate Courtney but when it comes to her movie roles, I find it hard to point out a bad one. People who are fans of these wonderful Actors will love this movie, promise!
Lo sapevi?
- Citazioni
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.
- Colonne sonoreShe's Gone
Written and Performed by Liz Phair
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Julie Johnson?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti