A final and late note on May/December--- the Golden Globe slot for this picture was "Comedy or Musical." I guess I really missed the boat on this one. My sense of humor must be dead!
While I sympathize with Vili Fualaau, and his desire to have his story told from his viewpoint, that was not this film. I can't imagine he wouldn't be able to find a willing writer/producer for such a film, though he should be warned that he might not have as much control over the content as he imagines.
To me, this movie was all about Joe. Gracie was simply the malignant narcissist who exploited a young boy and created chaos in the lives of everyone she touched. Elizabeth was the narcissist who exploited the chaos and set the events of the film in motion.
The only character who grows is Joe. To me it appeared he had been sleepwalking through the life of a loving husband and father, not really daring to think about what had happened. The film is about his gradual awakening to what might have been done to him. Although it happened very quietly, his question to Gracie at the end was explosive.
And whether Fualaau likes it or not, the fact that he and LeTourneau did divorce, makes such a realization believable.
poor real world inspirations - never to leave public scrutiny, forever to re-live their trauma as rendered by people who're just making a buck off them - perhaps movie makers and authors could do more work and use the Real World Inspiration to lead them to original story-telling
art is more important then than some unfortunate people's feelings...? re-victimizing, seems to me - IMO, any work "based" on a living person's experiences should only be done with the permission and input of that person (which means there would be no Crown, but owell)
If you’re making an actual biopic, maybe. (I’d still argue against this rule but I could at least understand the argument.) If you’re making a movie that is fiction but has a real world inspiration, it’s an untenable rule.
I knew nothing of the events covered in "May/December" because I didn't watch Nancy Grace or the tabloid press. So I came into the film with a blank slate. In my past I have worked with sexually abused kids so I was wary about the handling of the content.
While I didn't love or hate the film I really liked the handling of the complexity of the story. We culturally ignore the sexual abuse of boys except when done by Catholic Priests. Her treatment was the exception to the rule for female abuse of boys which passes almost unnoticed in our society. Probably the only reason she was punished was because of the grotesque consequences of the rape. Male abuse of boys get stigmatized and punished severely but most boys abused by women get "bragging rights" from peers and society assigns it more as a rite of passage than the traumatic and harmful event that it is. And the damaging effect was made clear in the film.
I only bothered to watch because of the cast and because it was a Todd Haynes film.
That whole LeTourneau story was icky. I remember feeling really bad that it was covered back when it happened. I don't see how any universal truths can be understood by reviewing that situation, no matter how sensitively written and excellently portrayed.
I would like to request more Michael Mann homework! Manhunter? An annual watch for me. Thief? Same. Heat? I am walking away from everything in 30 seconds if I feel the heat coming around the corner.
I agree with most of what you wrote. Having said that, my wife and I both found May/December grotesque. We utterly hated it, and are sorry it was made. We agree with the comments of the real life victim as well. Now, he will be eternally victimized because of this piece of trash. We hope it wins no awards at all. Maybe a Razzie. Or several.
A final and late note on May/December--- the Golden Globe slot for this picture was "Comedy or Musical." I guess I really missed the boat on this one. My sense of humor must be dead!
While I sympathize with Vili Fualaau, and his desire to have his story told from his viewpoint, that was not this film. I can't imagine he wouldn't be able to find a willing writer/producer for such a film, though he should be warned that he might not have as much control over the content as he imagines.
To me, this movie was all about Joe. Gracie was simply the malignant narcissist who exploited a young boy and created chaos in the lives of everyone she touched. Elizabeth was the narcissist who exploited the chaos and set the events of the film in motion.
The only character who grows is Joe. To me it appeared he had been sleepwalking through the life of a loving husband and father, not really daring to think about what had happened. The film is about his gradual awakening to what might have been done to him. Although it happened very quietly, his question to Gracie at the end was explosive.
And whether Fualaau likes it or not, the fact that he and LeTourneau did divorce, makes such a realization believable.
Are you *sure*, Sonny, that awards show isn't satire? Because it sounds like it's awfully on the nose.
poor real world inspirations - never to leave public scrutiny, forever to re-live their trauma as rendered by people who're just making a buck off them - perhaps movie makers and authors could do more work and use the Real World Inspiration to lead them to original story-telling
art is more important then than some unfortunate people's feelings...? re-victimizing, seems to me - IMO, any work "based" on a living person's experiences should only be done with the permission and input of that person (which means there would be no Crown, but owell)
If you’re making an actual biopic, maybe. (I’d still argue against this rule but I could at least understand the argument.) If you’re making a movie that is fiction but has a real world inspiration, it’s an untenable rule.
I detested May/December..had no idea it was based on truth. How pathetically sad.
I knew nothing of the events covered in "May/December" because I didn't watch Nancy Grace or the tabloid press. So I came into the film with a blank slate. In my past I have worked with sexually abused kids so I was wary about the handling of the content.
While I didn't love or hate the film I really liked the handling of the complexity of the story. We culturally ignore the sexual abuse of boys except when done by Catholic Priests. Her treatment was the exception to the rule for female abuse of boys which passes almost unnoticed in our society. Probably the only reason she was punished was because of the grotesque consequences of the rape. Male abuse of boys get stigmatized and punished severely but most boys abused by women get "bragging rights" from peers and society assigns it more as a rite of passage than the traumatic and harmful event that it is. And the damaging effect was made clear in the film.
I only bothered to watch because of the cast and because it was a Todd Haynes film.
That whole LeTourneau story was icky. I remember feeling really bad that it was covered back when it happened. I don't see how any universal truths can be understood by reviewing that situation, no matter how sensitively written and excellently portrayed.
I would like to request more Michael Mann homework! Manhunter? An annual watch for me. Thief? Same. Heat? I am walking away from everything in 30 seconds if I feel the heat coming around the corner.
I celebrate the man’s entire catalog!
I agree with most of what you wrote. Having said that, my wife and I both found May/December grotesque. We utterly hated it, and are sorry it was made. We agree with the comments of the real life victim as well. Now, he will be eternally victimized because of this piece of trash. We hope it wins no awards at all. Maybe a Razzie. Or several.
I frankly didn’t love the movie either.