Tools
Aggravating and cloying from minute one, (500) Days of Summer feels like it was written by a bunch of marketing executives who just took a class on indie quirkiness at the Learning Annex. Joseph Gordon-Levitt (yes, yes, adorable, in adorable cardigans) falls in love with Zooey Deschanel (yes, yes, her giant eyeballs), but she does not believe in love. They flash backward and forward through the 500 days of their doomed and dull relationship, doing gimmicky young-people things like appreciating Los Angeles (most people just don't get it) and listening to this little indie band called the Smiths (who!?!!?!?!?) and trying to remember the tune to the Knight Rider theme. I wanted. To die.
The idea here, the thing, the reason this movie thinks it's smart, is that it's not just another romantic comedy (it basically screams NOT JUST ANOTHER ROMANTIC COMEDY from every rooftop in Silver Lake or wherever-the-fuck-is-the-new-Silver-Lake). It is NOT about a boy and a girl who fall in love, and then there's conflict and they break up, but then the wisdom of children happens (or some shit), and one of them realizes that the other one was the one they wanted all along, and till death do us smooch, then grandma (Cloris Leachman, I'm sure) says something sexual and falls in the cake. You know. It's not that.
Stranger Personals
What happens here is much more true to life: Tom (Gordon-Levitt) is
infatuated with Summer (Deschanel). Summer only kind of likes Tom, but
he can't see it because of his big, fat infatuation. So she says she
doesn't want a relationship, but he thinks if he's persistent she'll
change her mind because of true love and all that, and she ends up
accidentally taking advantage of him, and he ends up getting hurt.
Sound familiar? OH RIGHT, THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S LIKE EVERY SINGLE BORING
RELATIONSHIP THAT YOU AND EVERYONE YOU KNOW HAS EVER HAD. Like a
late-night chat with some friend who should have gotten over it a year
ago but still wants to talk and talk and talk—now played out
on-screen in all its repetitive, stubborn glory. Plus the Smiths.
Hooray? 
Share via
1
Hmmm, maybe this movie will replace "Garden State" as the most cliche' ridden movie I've ever seen. On second thought I Hope I never find out.
2
for some reason i didnt really want to see this movie until your review. even with it being a negative one.
5
My son and his girlfriend really enjoyed this movie earlier this week, and most of the full series passholders at SIFF enjoyed it as well.
Lindy might not like it, but tough.
Lindy might not like it, but tough.
6
I agree with #1's assessment of "Garden State". I was really excited about that movie from the trailer, and really disappointed by it after seeing it. This movie sounds like a waste of time.
7
@5: Most people liked it because most people are stupid. Yes, even the ones with SIFF tickets. Popularity is rarely a barometer for quality. Lindy articulates the quirkiness blight well, and thank her sweet ass for that because people who depend on quirk and sniveling cuteness to the nth degree need to be called on their bullshit! Otherwise people will keep giving them awards and money and they won't ever stop! There's a reason I've never been able to sit through Juno. Just the other day I landed on it flipping channels and wanted to strangle Ellen Page within a minute. No real human says "I figured you could never have enough of your favorite one-calorie breath mints." Fuck you, AMPAS, for rewarding that spooge drizzle.
And marry me, Lindy.
And marry me, Lindy.
8
@5: Most people liked it because most people are stupid. Yes, even the ones with SIFF tickets. Popularity is rarely a barometer for quality. Lindy articulates the quirkiness blight well, and thank her sweet ass for that because people who depend on quirk and sniveling cuteness alone need to be called on their bullshit! Otherwise people will keep giving them awards and money and they won't ever stop! There's a reason I've never been able to sit through Juno. Just the other day I landed on it flipping channels and wanted to strangle Ellen Page within a minute. No real human says "I figured you could never have enough of your favorite one-calorie breath mints." Fuck you for rewarding that spooge drizzle, AMPAS.
9
I haven't seen it, MML.
I loved Ellen Page in that movie and Garden State rocks. Not just the soundtrack.
I loved Ellen Page in that movie and Garden State rocks. Not just the soundtrack.
10
I read this review, and was immediately able to envision everything wrong with it, almost as though I had seen it.
I didn't really think much more about it until I saw that A.O. Scott loved it, thought it hit a "delicate balance" or something.
How did that idiot ever get a job with a respected paper? I mean, seriously, I'm not all like "NY Times == BEST THINKING EVAR!", but that man is so consistently and spectactularly wrong about everything that I now expect to be shocked by the unexpected stupidity of each successive review.
Just sayin'.
/off-topic
I didn't really think much more about it until I saw that A.O. Scott loved it, thought it hit a "delicate balance" or something.
How did that idiot ever get a job with a respected paper? I mean, seriously, I'm not all like "NY Times == BEST THINKING EVAR!", but that man is so consistently and spectactularly wrong about everything that I now expect to be shocked by the unexpected stupidity of each successive review.
Just sayin'.
/off-topic
11
I enjoyed it. I was put off by the forced quirkiness, but I wasn't blinded by it. I liked the plot, I liked the time shifts. It was fun to watch a realistic story presented in a non-realist way, rather than the other way around, as in the tradition of romantic comedies gone by.
It was definitely an indie outreach program, but it wasn't nearly as bad as Juno. That film was suffocating.
It was definitely an indie outreach program, but it wasn't nearly as bad as Juno. That film was suffocating.
13
Awww, and here I thought I'd be the first to compare the NYT's review against Lindy's. Ah well. I can definitely say I enjoyed yours more, Lindy. "I wanted. To die." had me laughing out loud.
14
@ Lee:
Oh, and I think you might be underestimating how desperate newspapers are nowadays for free advertising. After all, the douche bag reviewer(s) at Rolling Stone seem to give high praise to just about any damn thing so long as it gets their magazine's name (with their "hip" typeface and all) onscreen in front of viewers, so maybe some of them will see it often enough to consider them some sort of fucking experts on film or something.
Oh, and I think you might be underestimating how desperate newspapers are nowadays for free advertising. After all, the douche bag reviewer(s) at Rolling Stone seem to give high praise to just about any damn thing so long as it gets their magazine's name (with their "hip" typeface and all) onscreen in front of viewers, so maybe some of them will see it often enough to consider them some sort of fucking experts on film or something.
15
I was in a theater a few weeks ago seeing a movie with my mom and the pre-preview advertising slideshow was running with repeated spots for this movie. I made a remark to my mom how it looks like another one of these calculatedly indie movies. Some guy sitting a few rows in front of us in the mostly empty theater turns around to reassure us that 'it's very sweet, blah blah blah'. Now after reading this review.... HAH! It seems MY SUSPICIONS WERE CORRECT!
16
@14: Not really what I'm getting at. Scott frequently pans movies, it's just that whatever he does is usually clueless. For laughs, go back and read his review of Watchmen (the film). The movie deserved to be panned, but he did so in a way implied that the book, which he clearly hadn't read, was the same thing as the movie, and so the two did not really deserve separate consideration.
Just a string of reviews from him that yammer on stupidly and get everything wrong, but in the tone of a high-brow film critic. I guess my point is: aren't there lots of genuine intellectuals and journalists out there looking for jobs?
Anyway, yes, 12, I'll take Lindy's reviews any day.
Just a string of reviews from him that yammer on stupidly and get everything wrong, but in the tone of a high-brow film critic. I guess my point is: aren't there lots of genuine intellectuals and journalists out there looking for jobs?
Anyway, yes, 12, I'll take Lindy's reviews any day.
17
Thank you, thank you thank you...Finally a review that makes sense. What a stupid boring movie that was.
18
choco, I liked Away We Go and couldn't stand this movie. In Away We Go, I cared about the characters and wanted things to work out for them. In this movie, Gordon-Levitt's character was just this delusional whiny jerk who DIDN'T GET IT when Deschanel's character kept telling him they were just friends, not a couple. Deschanel's character was this blank-eyed bitch who kept stringing Gordon-Levitt's character along even though he CLEARLY didn't get it. It was annoying and I wanted it to be over. I can't believe how well-reviewed this piece of garbage is.
20
grandma says something sexual and falls in the cake...probably the funniest thing i'll read all day. thank you lindy.
22
I saw the movie today, and while I totally agree with Lindy (as I usually do), I'm bothered that no one's talking about how intentionally blank Dechanel's character was. Despite walking away feeling like I'd become a walking cliché (yes I like Regina Spektor, and The Smiths, and Belle and Sebastian, and the Fruit Bats, etc. etc.; yes, I've been in relationships like this), I actually thought it was interesting. Interesting that despite all this delusional bewitchment—despite this "whiney jerk"'s so-called "obsession" with her—we didn't learn a thing about her except that she once said she liked The Smiths. Wasn't that kind of an interesting point about the difference between love and these kinds of infatuations, or am I being too charitable?
23
A. The Smiths are overrated. Seriously, boring shit.
B. Oh no, Zooey character isn't developed. And real girls are?
C. Cliches are derivatives nodes of real life perpetuated ad nauseam. Punk rockers don't wear studded jackets and patches? Cardigans aren't popular with east of I5? Tight jeans are pervasive. Shock! Gasp!
We really hate ourselves these days. That a movie would depict us as so, use our iPod playlists as soundtrack inspiration and even shine a light on our vacant relationships built on infatuation and fears of self-reliance is unfathomable. We should riot!
Idiots = This town
B. Oh no, Zooey character isn't developed. And real girls are?
C. Cliches are derivatives nodes of real life perpetuated ad nauseam. Punk rockers don't wear studded jackets and patches? Cardigans aren't popular with east of I5? Tight jeans are pervasive. Shock! Gasp!
We really hate ourselves these days. That a movie would depict us as so, use our iPod playlists as soundtrack inspiration and even shine a light on our vacant relationships built on infatuation and fears of self-reliance is unfathomable. We should riot!
Idiots = This town
24
Does watching a film suddenly transform the viewer into a super genius? Apparently in Seattle it does... Uhm, pay your 10 bucks and pull the stick out of your ass.
26
I think "assassinave" just handed you your ass. Usually I love Stranger reviews, but I really think you missed on this one. Sure, the movie had flaws, but honestly, what movie doesn't. It really didn't even try to be overly quirky (there was no horribly forced hip dialogue, the only thing that really bugged me was the mandator precocious little kid). It was funny, clever, and like you said, true to events that actually happen in normal people lives.
Want a calculatedly indie movie? Check every movie previewed before this one. Paper Heart? Whip It? Ew.
Want a calculatedly indie movie? Check every movie previewed before this one. Paper Heart? Whip It? Ew.
27
@23. Let me get this straight, your point is that the reviewer is wrong in disliking this movie strictly on the basis of its precious quirkiness? You say this because the movie is actually pointing out how we really DO base our lives on silly things like skinny jeans and mix tapes and emotionally underdeveloped women?("I mean, what real girls are developed anyway??????") The director and actors were all on in on a massive joke in that they are fashioning a giant moonbeam of cloying starlight at the hipster masses and their alternative cute lifestyles?
From what I can tell, Marc Webb, the director of the film previously directed "Jesse McCartney: Up Close," another 'film' called "3 Doors Down: Away from the Sun," and something called a "Seascape." The writers of the film also were on the writing team for such films as "Pink Panther 2" and "Pink Panther 2". So if you're under the impression these guys have made a lampooning of indie culture and its vacuous nature, or even more laudable, a meditation on the state of young love and its proclivity to lean on hollow tenets like popular media and fashion and nostalgia, then you should recheck your nodes.
From what I can tell, Marc Webb, the director of the film previously directed "Jesse McCartney: Up Close," another 'film' called "3 Doors Down: Away from the Sun," and something called a "Seascape." The writers of the film also were on the writing team for such films as "Pink Panther 2" and "Pink Panther 2". So if you're under the impression these guys have made a lampooning of indie culture and its vacuous nature, or even more laudable, a meditation on the state of young love and its proclivity to lean on hollow tenets like popular media and fashion and nostalgia, then you should recheck your nodes.
28
Hey Choco,
I loved Away We Go too, but I would have to agree with Lindy about this movie. Away We Go has a little of the hipster bait in it, but but underneath still had interesting character development and a plot.
500 Days of Summer has the intelligence of a cell phone commercial. Plus, it's attracting the most obnoxious bitchy cranky dumbass customers.
I loved Away We Go too, but I would have to agree with Lindy about this movie. Away We Go has a little of the hipster bait in it, but but underneath still had interesting character development and a plot.
500 Days of Summer has the intelligence of a cell phone commercial. Plus, it's attracting the most obnoxious bitchy cranky dumbass customers.
29
while i agree that certain aspects of the film were a little too precious (summer's apartment looked like an anthropologie store, voice-over omniscient narration, even the ending- although i liked it), it still still a MOVIE. fake. not real. not a documentary.
geez. OF COURSE they are going to string together cultural references that are a little bit MORE obvious, but that is because this is not an art film- it wants to be seen! what is so wrong with that?
i like the smiths, i like belle and sebastian, and i liked this movie. sorry- quirky things become mainstream and become "quirky" leading snobs to suddenly abandon them because it doesn't make them unique, special snowflakes anymore. so annoying.
so they chose to feature bands that a larger number of people will recognize than say the books or the magnetic fields- i fail to see the problem.
geez. OF COURSE they are going to string together cultural references that are a little bit MORE obvious, but that is because this is not an art film- it wants to be seen! what is so wrong with that?
i like the smiths, i like belle and sebastian, and i liked this movie. sorry- quirky things become mainstream and become "quirky" leading snobs to suddenly abandon them because it doesn't make them unique, special snowflakes anymore. so annoying.
so they chose to feature bands that a larger number of people will recognize than say the books or the magnetic fields- i fail to see the problem.
30
oh oops the magnetic fields were in a target commercial- by this board's standards that probably makes them U2
31
Good review, Lindy. The two minute trailer for this film was several more than I wanted to see. Damn them for sullying The Smiths by association!!
The Smiths are overrated? Yeah, right -- compared to what??!! I read these comments, and heaven knows I'm miserable now.
The Smiths are overrated? Yeah, right -- compared to what??!! I read these comments, and heaven knows I'm miserable now.
32
Hey haven't seen the movie but I tend to agree with many of Lindy's critiques so perhaps I skip this one. BTW when are you? Lindy, going to be a Rotten Tomatoes critic. They could stand to use your sharp wit and analysis. There is a void!
a guy who is tired of joining to make a comment.
a guy who is tired of joining to make a comment.
33
You've completely missed the point of this film by railing against its indie quirkiness. Playing the "Garden State" card? Fucking yawn. This film was a smart, artful gem that deserves better treatment than this.
34
Reading this review almost kept me from seeing the movie, which would have been a shame. I enjoyed it despite having been prejudiced against it. And furthermore, this movie is not the egregious pile of indie-washed laundry you make it out to be. There are gimmicky bits, and the hand-sketched aesthetic is a fad that will burn out in two years, but the story is well put together and the movie is genuinely funny.
I'm sorry you can't listen to the Smiths any more because they're too popular now, but maybe you should be a little less sanctimonious about enforcing the indie / sellout boundary and pay attention to what's on the screen.
I'm sorry you can't listen to the Smiths any more because they're too popular now, but maybe you should be a little less sanctimonious about enforcing the indie / sellout boundary and pay attention to what's on the screen.
35
My partner who saw this movie said the gay jokes and thinly-veiled homophobia that all the stupid people in the audience laughed at was almost too much to bear. She also mentioned the same drivilous faux-indie incidents Lindy points out.
She was wondering if the gay thing was all in her gay head until her straight female friend apologized profusely for bringing her to the movie while they washed their hands in the bathroom. C-R-A-P!
She was wondering if the gay thing was all in her gay head until her straight female friend apologized profusely for bringing her to the movie while they washed their hands in the bathroom. C-R-A-P!
36
For me, this movie was a touching movie. It may not last forever, and it may not be worthy of high praise, but it is definitely in need of some defense.
I think the railing against this movie simply on the basis of "forced quirkiness" is tacky. I'm around plenty of assholes who use this kind of reasoning as an excuse to be condescending and aggressive. The way it sounds to me, half of these criticisms are shallow and overly defensive / offended / disgusted for NO FUCKING REASON, and that includes even Lindy's review. Stop freaking out by the use of The Smiths or what-the-fuck-ever that people actually talk about. I'm pretty damn sure that's what it's trying to capture.
Now I am no published film critic, so you're welcome to write me off here. But the style of this film was tactfully done, and it touched me, and even if it is the faux-indie-piece-of-shit you claim it to be, that doesn't it stop it from maybe kind of being actually a decent movie. It took real life and put it to the screen, and that's what they meant to do, and that's what they accomplished. Because it's supposed to be like "EVERY BORING RELATIONSHIP THAT YOU AND EVERYONE YOU KNOW HAS EVER HAD," and I'm fairly sure the marketing executives fresh from the Learning Annex made that clear.
So calm the fuck down. It's not The Best Movie Ever Made. It's not by The Best Director That Ever Lived. And it doesn't have to be Your Favorite Movie of All Time.
Stop pulling the "I'm superior to this movie" card and don't ruin it for the rest of us. Some people out there actually like to like things.
I think the railing against this movie simply on the basis of "forced quirkiness" is tacky. I'm around plenty of assholes who use this kind of reasoning as an excuse to be condescending and aggressive. The way it sounds to me, half of these criticisms are shallow and overly defensive / offended / disgusted for NO FUCKING REASON, and that includes even Lindy's review. Stop freaking out by the use of The Smiths or what-the-fuck-ever that people actually talk about. I'm pretty damn sure that's what it's trying to capture.
Now I am no published film critic, so you're welcome to write me off here. But the style of this film was tactfully done, and it touched me, and even if it is the faux-indie-piece-of-shit you claim it to be, that doesn't it stop it from maybe kind of being actually a decent movie. It took real life and put it to the screen, and that's what they meant to do, and that's what they accomplished. Because it's supposed to be like "EVERY BORING RELATIONSHIP THAT YOU AND EVERYONE YOU KNOW HAS EVER HAD," and I'm fairly sure the marketing executives fresh from the Learning Annex made that clear.
So calm the fuck down. It's not The Best Movie Ever Made. It's not by The Best Director That Ever Lived. And it doesn't have to be Your Favorite Movie of All Time.
Stop pulling the "I'm superior to this movie" card and don't ruin it for the rest of us. Some people out there actually like to like things.
37
I'm a little late to the discussion, but...
Ugh. Finally went to see this dreadful piece of crap this week. You hit the nail on the head, Lindy.
What some people who've left comments don't seem to get is that what's irritating about the film isn't that The Smiths' music is featured in it. Okay, they're a nice band. But the two "romantic" leads first connect (alone in the elevator at work, of course... just one of many cliches heaved onto the screen) when she overhears a song by The Smiths on his headphones. She comments that she loves the band and then he goes berserk because he can't believe he actually found a girl who's heard of The Smiths and SHE EVEN LIKES THEM!!!
That just doesn't make any sense. It doesn't take a hipster elitist to realize that almost everybody between ages 20 and 40 has heard of The Smiths and lots of people like them. The guy's overreaction of shocked disbelief that he found a girl who's into The Smiths might be acceptable if they were in an elevator in Minot, North Dakota... or maybe if the gal confessed that she shared the guy's fondness for Engelbert Humperdinck... but it's The Smiths and they're in Los Angeles. It just doesn't make any sense.
This problem plagues the entire movie; like you say, Lindy, it's as if the writers are working from an outdated manual on "indie quirkiness." The whole film feels phony and contrived—even down to the annoying and extraneous parentheses used in the title. And yes, that worldly-wise little girl was the worst of all. I just wanted to slap her.
Ugh. Finally went to see this dreadful piece of crap this week. You hit the nail on the head, Lindy.
What some people who've left comments don't seem to get is that what's irritating about the film isn't that The Smiths' music is featured in it. Okay, they're a nice band. But the two "romantic" leads first connect (alone in the elevator at work, of course... just one of many cliches heaved onto the screen) when she overhears a song by The Smiths on his headphones. She comments that she loves the band and then he goes berserk because he can't believe he actually found a girl who's heard of The Smiths and SHE EVEN LIKES THEM!!!
That just doesn't make any sense. It doesn't take a hipster elitist to realize that almost everybody between ages 20 and 40 has heard of The Smiths and lots of people like them. The guy's overreaction of shocked disbelief that he found a girl who's into The Smiths might be acceptable if they were in an elevator in Minot, North Dakota... or maybe if the gal confessed that she shared the guy's fondness for Engelbert Humperdinck... but it's The Smiths and they're in Los Angeles. It just doesn't make any sense.
This problem plagues the entire movie; like you say, Lindy, it's as if the writers are working from an outdated manual on "indie quirkiness." The whole film feels phony and contrived—even down to the annoying and extraneous parentheses used in the title. And yes, that worldly-wise little girl was the worst of all. I just wanted to slap her.
38
The part about it being like every single boring relationship you've ever been in, well, wasn't that sort of the point? I mean, every other damn romance movie is so effing gushy, true love, fluff in extreme. The point I think of this is that this was supposed to be a portrayal of an actual relationship, awkward and pathetic and boring as they can be.
40
You know what else kills with quirkiness and tries waaay too hard to be hip? The Stranger. They're right with this review though. This movie was annoying.
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (40) RSS