Dang, I meant to re-post this sorta review here about a month ago.
In a nutshell, I don't particularly care for the what the Amy Poehler and the Hollywood Movie Machine did with Jennifer Mathieu's YA novel Moxie. The more I think about it, especially after I've reread the book, the more quibbles I find with the film adaptation. Nevertheless, it's worth watching, especially if it raises the consciousness of girls and young women in the US and elsewhere and encourages them to read the far superior source material.
Here's my January 2018 review of the book itself.
In a nutshell, I don't particularly care for the what the Amy Poehler and the Hollywood Movie Machine did with Jennifer Mathieu's YA novel Moxie. The more I think about it, especially after I've reread the book, the more quibbles I find with the film adaptation. Nevertheless, it's worth watching, especially if it raises the consciousness of girls and young women in the US and elsewhere and encourages them to read the far superior source material.
Here's my January 2018 review of the book itself.
This review (on Polygon, complete with spoilers) approximates my own opinion of Amy Poehler's "Moxie" adaptation: flawed, but worthy. I urge you to see it if you can, & not just because I'm privileged to know the source material's author. It gets its message across effectively despite the flaws, and the performances of the young leads are mostly excellent (Poehler's performance is meh). If you have kids 10-17, especially girls, watch it with them & talk about it afterward. There's some mild cussing, including the single PG-13 f-bomb.
In addition to all the missed opportunities & clunky dialog observed in the review, some scenes made me wonder whether anyone involved in the project had ever attended a public high school (or a high school football game in particular). Movie high school doesn't always have to look or function like real high school (Roger Corman's "Rock & Roll High School" sure didn't, but that was by design); however, author Jennifer Mathieu, a high school English teacher, got the atmosphere SO RIGHT that it's a shame the movie doesn't.
Here's the film's biggest sin of omission, IMHO: the generic setting. I had worried that moving the story out of the Texas shrimping town (the fictional East Rockport) would deprive the film of a lot of the book's flavor, but the film also completely bleeds out all the book's working-class grit. In fact, while it shines a harsh spotlight on sexism, racism, ablism, & several other evils, it ignores issues of class entirely. Viv's mom, as played by Poehler, looks comfortably suburban & middle-class, like the Rockport in the film, not at all like the world-weary ex–Riot Grrrl single mom that I remember from the book. The mom acknowledges that the protest movements from her youth weren't intersectional enough, but any intersectionality in the movie's Moxie protests is either awkwardly forced or just omitted.
Again, there's no requirement to replicate the book or address EVERY societal ill, but why would you strip out elements of the book that make it great? These are students & families who don't have much money or other resources, but figure out how to accomplish a lot with what little they have.
I don't fault Poehler for any of this. Most likely, as a fan of the book & the one who stepped up to buy the movie rights, she's not the one responsible for stripping out so much of the story's soul. Blame the studio bigwigs & the hyper-focus-grouped Hollywood Zeitgeist.
In addition to all the missed opportunities & clunky dialog observed in the review, some scenes made me wonder whether anyone involved in the project had ever attended a public high school (or a high school football game in particular). Movie high school doesn't always have to look or function like real high school (Roger Corman's "Rock & Roll High School" sure didn't, but that was by design); however, author Jennifer Mathieu, a high school English teacher, got the atmosphere SO RIGHT that it's a shame the movie doesn't.
Here's the film's biggest sin of omission, IMHO: the generic setting. I had worried that moving the story out of the Texas shrimping town (the fictional East Rockport) would deprive the film of a lot of the book's flavor, but the film also completely bleeds out all the book's working-class grit. In fact, while it shines a harsh spotlight on sexism, racism, ablism, & several other evils, it ignores issues of class entirely. Viv's mom, as played by Poehler, looks comfortably suburban & middle-class, like the Rockport in the film, not at all like the world-weary ex–Riot Grrrl single mom that I remember from the book. The mom acknowledges that the protest movements from her youth weren't intersectional enough, but any intersectionality in the movie's Moxie protests is either awkwardly forced or just omitted.
Again, there's no requirement to replicate the book or address EVERY societal ill, but why would you strip out elements of the book that make it great? These are students & families who don't have much money or other resources, but figure out how to accomplish a lot with what little they have.
I don't fault Poehler for any of this. Most likely, as a fan of the book & the one who stepped up to buy the movie rights, she's not the one responsible for stripping out so much of the story's soul. Blame the studio bigwigs & the hyper-focus-grouped Hollywood Zeitgeist.
RSS Feed