Forum Overview :: Peter Molyneux's The Movies :: Julie and Julia

[quote name="Mischief Maker"]My obsession with Kitchen Nightmares turned into a new hobby of cooking Gordon Ramsay recipes these last few months. This has had the unfortunate side effect that my family <I>insisted</I> I watch this flick over Christmas because I can, like, totally relate! The movie is based on two true stories, the rise to fame of Celebrity Chef Julia Child, and the story of Julie Whatzername, who did a blog about cooking all the recipes in Childs' cookbook in the space of a single year. The Julia Child parts are actually really interesting and enjoyable, while the Julie Whatzername parts are probably the perfect example of why I loathe Sex in the City and chick flicks in general. On one hand you have a charming dynamic woman building success from scratch while battling obstacles personal, political, and cultural, on the other you have a spunky shallow naif who is constantly reduced to tears by the mild annoyances that pop up in her boring life. It almost feels insulting the way the movie tries to draw parallels between the two characters: Julia Child enrolls in a master chef class in paris despite being the only woman in a class full of men and deals with an evil headmistress who refuses to grant her certificate, Julie Whatzername is jealous of her friends' success and starts a blog to show up the friend she hates the most. Julia Child's CIA husband is investigated by McCarthy, Julie Whatzername thinks boiling live lobsters is icky. Julia Child is shot down by idiot publishers who want to publish recipes using hamburger helper, Julie Whatzername accidentally dumps the roast on the kitchen floor and collapses into a puddle of tears while her husband (who is so bland and devoid of personality that he must have come packaged with the IKEA furniture) tells her what a wonderful writer she is. After years (decades even?) of hard work and perseverence, Julia Child publishes her book to rave success, after a single year of blogging, Julie Whatzername has over 60 messages on her answering machine from publishers and literary agents because her blog was popular on Salon, eventually leading to a book deal, and the film itself. This last part is especially galling because it's clear she's not a very good writer. The movie contains samples from her year long daily blog read out loud to the audience and her most insightful entry is when she says that <I>butter is good</I>. There is a small ounce of justice toward the end of the film when it turns out real life Julia Child hated Julie Whatzername's blog, ha ha! But then her bland husband carefully explains to her that the real Julia Child isn't important. The important one is the imaginary Julia Child that Whatzername made up in her head. A really strange moral for the film, especially when the major conflict for Whatzername was that her blogging was making her too narcissistic. So in the end Whatzername is world famous and successful on the coattails of a much more interesting and talented woman and the final scene is her and her bland husband at the Smithsonian looking at Julia Child's kitchen. As a final nod to the imaginary Julia Child, Whatzername puts a whole box of butter on top of the display under the hot lights, ensuring that she will leave an enduring mark on the exhibit etched in melted rancid butter. If they come up with a special edition DVD that only shows the Julia Child scenes it might be worth watching, but fuck Julie Whatzername and fuck her fucking blog.[/quote]