It’s Not Good, But It’s Not Bad Either

Me and You and Everyone We Know – I think that it’s very possible that if I saw this film at a different point in my life (when I was 19 or 20 maybe?), it may have struck an emotional chord with me, or I would have at least been more impressed by its gawky charm. This may seem very facile to the film’s passionate supporters, but I don’t see this movie as being particularly joycore, and I just don’t have room in my life for tweemo cinema at this moment in time. Whereas other people seem to be getting a “everybody deserves to be loved and make real connections with other people” message from the film, all I see is a bunch of characters totally crippled by their neediness and loneliness, who never quite advance beyond that stage in spite of some rather arc-y screenwriting. Is profound emotional immaturity a sort of virtue in Miranda July’s world? Are hugs and let’s-hold-hands togetherness really the answer to everything? As noted by several other critics, July clearly loves her characters too much, and I would suggest that she has a rather misguided affection for her own creations.

Though the film follows an assortment of interconnected characters, the A story follows the painfully awkward romance of July’s character and a recently divorced shoe salesman played by Deadwood‘s John Hawkes. The two lack chemistry entirely, and it’s never quite clear why July takes a liking to him other than that he may be the only available man that she knows, and he has the same propensity for revealing far too much about his interior world at totally inappropriate moments. There are several chunks of dialogue spouted off by these two characters that are just far too precious and over the top for their own good, to the point that I realized about halfway through the film that Batman Begins was actually a more plausible film in spite of Me and You‘s mundane setting. July does better with her supporting characters, particularly with Hawkes’ two young sons, but it’s never enough to make up for the relative ickiness of the leads.

I hate that the film’s ostensible villain is a curator who rejects the shitty, amateurish video art made by July’s character, and that she ultimately includes her in a museum show because July has wheedled her way into it, and the curator has realized how very sad and lonely she is. Oh boo hoo, Miranda! Some people have to reject things in life. Some people have to be critical. And thank God for that! Todd Serencha at The Face Knife absolutely nails this point:

It’s hard for me to take the film seriously philosophically when the world is so twee. Out of “everyone we know,” everyone is a secret snuggler, and I say to that Nay. It would be kind of hell to live in a world where people are spontaneously participating in little art projects or where cuddle parties are liable to break out at the drop of a guard.

Dub Narcotic Sound System featuring Miranda July “Out Of Your Mind” – So yeah, it’s not very shocking that with her combination of starving-artist pretensions, twee sensibility, and yearning for a supportive community, July would have ended up collaborating with Calvin Johnson at some point. That’s just sort of inevitable, right? This isn’t anything new, though – it goes back to 1998. This track will always bring to mind nostalgic thoughts of The Black Cat in Washington, DC, though I am almost entirely certain that the images and “memories” that it evokes aren’t in any way rooted in any actual experiences that I had during my brief time living in that city. But it’s probably better that way, given what a boring, depressive, repressed mess I was back then, and that I don’t remember the other people being that much different. (Click here to buy it from K Records.)

August 8th edit: The comments box discussion for this entry was particularly good, and since Haloscan eventually deletes them for space, here are the best bits of the thread for readers who come by and check this post out via Google in the future. All of the comments credited to Matthew are my own words.

Chalk up one reader who emphatically disagrees. I loved the movie, though I should note that I don’t see it as having “everybody deserves to be loved and make real connections with other people” as one of its themes at all. Though it appears I disagree on several fronts – I never saw the museum curator as a villain (certainly not after the “macaroni” bit, which happens shortly after you meet her), and I think the suggestion that July loves her characters too much is way off-base; she simply doesn’t judge any of them at all (this type of debate is, of course, always at the center of discussion about Solondz’ movies, which this has been compared to in some reviews – does he want to punish his characters? etc.) I related majorly to the idea that in moments of loneliness, we tend to fixate on details and give significance to small gestures (the banana sticker in John Hawkes’ car, the quarter the man hands the kid, the way a shoe fits, etc.)
Fuck, I don’t know, I loved it. Then again, the notion of people spontaneously participating in little art projects sounds excellent to me.
The Fixin’s Bar | 06.28.05 – 2:23 pm | #

Yeah, I wouldn’t say that it was a bad movie, cos I see an incredible power in this film to really make people happy or inspire them, etc. It just meant little to me, and so I only really think about the accumulation of little things that I really hated in the film, because that’s what lingers in my mind.
Matthew | Homepage | 06.28.05 – 2:27 pm | #

At the very least, you had to have loved the initital “back and forth” scene, right?

))((
The Fixin’s Bar | 06.28.05 – 3:56 pm | #

“Is profound emotional immaturity a sort of virtue in Miranda July’s world?”

She’s from Olympia. You do the math.
mike | Homepage | 06.28.05 – 4:04 pm | #

Actually, she is not from Olympia, she is from the Bay and spent a few years in Portland. She has a lot of reverence for everyone’s art and connection through art — she was basically the film arm of Riot Girl, with her DIY film/feminist video chainletter MISS MOVIOLA. Which is applaudable and not cynical. I am not sure why so many people see the neediness as pathetic, or even see neediness so profoundly and are so quick to typify it as negative. I see the film being about being failing and flailing in our humanity, where child sexuality intersects with adult word ( rather than adults scared of sex as the Reader’s J. Rosenbaum called it as), it felt very real – the people I know in my life are p[eculiar and desperate and want to be loved and suffering and showing up at thier crushes work with socks on their ears like Eeyore. They are doing

rabbit rabbit style hex removal by touching banana stickers. I think there is a huge difference between TWEE and PAYING ATTENTION TO DETAIL. Twee means you are not brave, you are sweet and smooshable, you are a Belle and Sebastian obsessive. Miranda’s movie is brave. Any movie that portrays teen sexuality as honestly as it does — rather than salacious OTT rub fantasy ala Thirteen or like Porky’s style virginity loss gigglefest — that cannot be twee. I think maybe people are taking MJuly’s egalitarian love and hope for something wide eyed and naive. The movie dares us to betray our cynicism.

Also, I suggest anyone who liked the movie checked out an art project project that miranda is involved with called learningtoloveyoumore.com
and also seek out MJ’s recent short stories published in Harvard Review and Paris Review — more on the themes of trying to get past yourself to have real connection with the world, and/intersection between adult world and kid world – the gap between.
Jessica Hopper | 06.28.05 – 4:34 pm | #

One thing that I did find really interesting about Me and You is how it presented all of the characters as though they were all the same age, but their age in most cases was something that boxed them in to their roles.

All of my favorite scenes were the ones involving teen sexuality, and I basically agree with Jessica on that score. It’s the adult relationships that bugged me – that’s where the tweeness came in as far as I’m concerned. I don’t think I could ever view neediness as being an attractive or admirable quality, so I think that’s the major point of philosophical departure here.
Matthew | Homepage | 06.28.05 – 4:51 pm | #

So Miranda July is kind of the Eminem of the hideously cute?
Eppy | Homepage | 06.28.05 – 6:08 pm | #

Can you unpack that a bit, Eppy?
Matthew | Homepage | 06.28.05 – 6:25 pm | #

So yr pissed at the movie for treating people precious or for the adults not being adult enough?

To need and to want to be needed – romantically or platonically — is not only one of the fundamental tenets of life, but it’s what about 86% of slow jams/pop-rock/indie-rock/sex-pop/mooney french vocal house etc etc is about. I think it’s such a strange thing to beef with. I mean, granted, on a sociological level, men are goaded to view “need” as weak and not part of their emotional palate, so that might make sense… though Fluxblog comments zone might not be the best place to through down some 80’s style gender essentialism, so pardon if that’s offending yr wild style. Also, re: ‘starving artist pretentions’ — I do not think there was ever pretense or pretend or anything other than tres vrai informed experience. Homegirl was making movies for $11 for years, and doing spoken word remix 12″s with IQU, I really doubt it paid the bills.
Jessica Hopper | 06.28.05 – 6:26 pm | #

“To need and to want to be needed – romantically or platonically — is not only one of the fundamental tenets of life, but it’s what about 86% of slow jams/pop-rock/indie-rock/sex-pop/mooney french vocal house etc etc is about.”

This is true, so my problem with the film is more in its style and execution. There’s nothing wrong with that theme per se (I loved Funny Ha Ha, which certainly dealt with similar things, but with far more subtlety and almost zero preciousness), but I think that July’s articulation of the idea and her apparent conclusions are something I just can’t get with at this point in time.
Matthew | Homepage | 06.28.05 – 6:42 pm | #

Fuck. I thought Hopper had my back until I got to the Belle & Sebastian-obsessive part. Because I loved “M&Y&EWK,” but I’m also one of those B&S freaks.
The Fixin’s Bar | 06.28.05 – 7:06 pm | #

I’ve never even heard of the movie but from the way everyone describes it–both supporters and detractors–it sounds fucking horrible. Makes me want to listen to my Big Black records.
Rich in CLE | 06.29.05 – 2:21 am | #

Er, unpacking: Jessica was making basically a realism argument, i.e. it’s OK that MJ is showing these repulsively cutesy things because friends of Jessica also do these things, which is one of the arguments made to justify Eminem back in the day, as I recall: sure, it’s odious, but it’s an accurate representation of white male underclass rage etc. etc. I guess this interpretation probably runs counter to MJ’s intentions–she was trying to charm people, not throw the terrifying reality of Northwestern cutsiness in their faces–but it’s funny, anyway.

Also, there’s a difference between “needing” and “being needy,” and from what I can see, Matthew’s decrying the latter. Being needy is regarded as a pretty much 100% negative, uber-turnoff amongst my peer group, which I can have show up en masse and vouch for their mixed-gender status etc. if needed.

Also: if anything, it’s the males I know that are needy, not the females! But then I hang around with dorks.

I think if you’re looking for men being masculine and not-weak, you’re barking up the wrong corner of the interweb.
Eppy | Homepage | 06.29.05 – 10:58 am | #

RE: the curator lady. Being from Portland, I recognized her character as so real–there has always been an entrenched artist beef w/ Portland Institute of Contemporary Art’s rigid lack of support for local artists, and their notorious one show a year (or in the case of the Portland Art Museum, the Oregon Biennial). (PICA is getting way better about this.) But it’s not just a Portland thing, it is an incredibly difficult, almost sadistic process for young artists to get into museums, always has been. Did you see the Diane Arbus exhibit at the Met? She pratically had to clean the Guggenheim’s toilet to get in. It was a realistic narrative, and not whiney or fitful at all, whereas it could have been. It was an interesting way to show the artists’ uphill climb for legitimacy, without really villainizing anyone.

It’s not so twee, either– w/miranda’s movie you have to distinguish between infantile and childlike, being willing to accept a kind of newness and openness into your life versus simply getting fetal (p.s. i don’t think the word childlike has neg connotations). Miranda’s movie wasn’t any more breathless, sweet than say Rushmore– its characters were odder actually, in a subtler manner. (I mean, she was stalking the shoe salesman. And it was more about being in the moment than romanticism, even–she started loving him just as her older friend told her he had wasted his life with someone he didn’t love, and mentally you could see she was like, “oh snap, carpe diem”–that was a real turning point in the movie.)

I think neediness is entirely relative. But I am actually curious as to what you would define as “being needy.” I have my own ideas but i would like to know what you think.

Personally I was like, “finally a movie with characters who feel as alienated lonely OCD weird and effed up as I and most people I know feel, but (this is key) never talk about–only these characters don’t end up offing themselves or marrying Richard Gere.” Their neuroses really spoke to that (i.e. Christine obsessively touching the round sticker on her dashboard.) I don’t think Miranda was making a concerted effort to charm people. She has spent the past like 14 yrs talking to all kinds of people about their lives for her art–she’s probably talked to more people than some journalists–and she was trying to present a real story of how real people deal, but put a little magic inside, to maybe manifest the impulses ppl suppress because of cynicism and fear. It was all about being on a limb.

Rich in CLE: you should totally check it out, it is a movie about fucking (kind of). And a guy lights his own h

and on fire.

one more thing, sorry–if you listen to the albums miranda made w/kill rock stars when she was living in oly, they are like the creepiest ever–more david lynch/dr demento. they’re terrific, broken-edged and nothing twee about them.
Julianne Shephard | Homepage | 06.29.05 – 5:46 pm | #

“there has always been an entrenched artist beef w/ Portland Institute of Contemporary Art’s rigid lack of support for local artists, and their notorious one show a year (or in the case of the Portland Art Museum, the Oregon Biennial).”

See, this is kinda the thinking that I hate – that curators of any kind have some kind of obligation to “local artists” regardless of whether or not said local artists are any good or interesting to the curator or something that will draw people and money to the institution. That “but I’m a local artist!” line always seems like a complaint born of entitlement.
Matthew | Homepage | 06.29.05 – 11:41 pm | #

oh i’m with you on that–ppl shouldn’t expect anything SIMPLY cause they’re local, if their work is substandard–i guess i should have clarified that PICA branched off the PAM because of its lack of local support/vision.
Julianne Shephard | Homepage | 06.30.05 – 10:03 am | #

It’s so refreshing to see a negative/constructive criticism about ‘Me And You And Everyone We Know’ – I thought it was poorly executed and thematically trivial. Yet everyone seems to love it – for no real reason apart from it’s universally dull goody-goodyness. There’s another amusing text/review over at this place: http://lost.burnthead.com/index….hp? showimage=27 Anyway, good review.
theguy | 06.30.05 – 12:48 pm | #

I’m 20 and I thought it was a total load of crap. The only highlights were the initial back-and-forth scene, as someone mentioned, and the salesman fitting the old man’s shoes, just because that’s a ridiculous procedure that needed to be committed to film.
Anthony | 06.30.05 – 3:14 pm | #

The part of my review that Matthew chose to excerpt here is mostly tongue-in-cheek; it’s a reflection of my own horror and fear of intimacy, ironically aligning me with some of the characters in July’s movie, because that’s pretty much the theme of the movie. Like Todd Solondz’s movies, July’s film is about the crazy things people do to establish or avoid intimacy, but unlike Solondz, July’s characters have the possibility of redemption. The possibility for growth is explicitly precluded in Solondzville, where as in Julysylvania, things can change in an instant, and you more or less don’t have to try. That’s what makes it twee, beyond the design, the music, etc. Twee is not necessarily a bad thing, but when coupled with the hermetic world of an over-workshopped short story, which is what July’s plot and characters are victim of, it seems to me, creates an ornamental view of life that’s incompatible with any serious feeling.

The comparison to Wes Anderson is apt – Anderson’s films are twee in design and concern, but his characters have explicit, dislikable flaws. He’ll err on the side of making someone unsympathetic (Steve Zissou) whereas July errs on the side of making everyone sympathetic.

That’s not to say that July is a shitty director/writer. The film is very funny, but I don’t think it transcends the indie ghetto from whence it came.
Todd | Homepage | 07.01.05 – 11:34 am | #

It’s funny that someone with such a cloyingly designed/written website would take Miranda July to task for being twee. Look at your logo, dude, and tell me that Fluxblog isn’t all about a desire to be cuddled.
Anonymous | 07.06.05 – 3:25 am | #

Style of Eye featuring Freeda “You Got That” – When they sing “you’ve got the feeling,” I don’t think they necessarily mean that it’s something that you have and that they are acknowledging, but rather something that they are granting you (or unlocking within you) at that moment in the song. It’s like a funky benediction. (Click here to buy it from Tunes.)

Also: I am way behind in checking/sorting through all the mp3s that get sent to the fluxblog @ gmail.com address, so please don’t be offended if it takes me a long time to even get to your email. As you can imagine, I am swamped with mp3s and cds, more and more all the time, and it’s almost impossible for me to be very fair with this while also having a life and working. This goes double for people who write me with link requests. I do not do link exchanges as a rule, but I do check every site and sometimes like them a lot. I will be changing the design and layout of this site sometime in the not-too-distant future, and the links section is either going to be reduced or expanded, I haven’t decided just yet. Either way, I haven’t been tinkering with the existing links bar much recently, except to add a handful of notable sites that I check regularly for one reason or another. Please don’t be offended or discouraged if I don’t link you immediately, or at all. The links are there for my own convenience more than anything else.