It seems every year a low budget comedy, preceded by the requisite hype, appears during the annual Oscar campaign season and makes a late spurt for those end-of-year awards.
“Little Miss Sunshine” was 2007’s pick. and this year, there is the Academy award nominated “Juno”.
Now that “Juno” has been in cinemas for a month, it has become necessary to stand athwart the acclaim to yell “STOP” and ask how good the film really is.
The plot is straightforward. Juno MacGuff, 16, gets pregnant after a midnight quickie with Paulie Bleeker. She decides on an abortion, later changes her mind, and then finally elects to deliver the baby so it can be given to a couple, Mark and Vanessa Loring for adoption.
However, contrary to the synopsis above or the claims by some reviewers, “Juno” is not a pro-life film. Indeed, it is a sign of the intellectual paucity of these times and the jaundiced views of most critics – a consequence of our partisan milieu – that allows this film to be celebrated as such.
In truth, “Juno” simply takes an unfortunate incident and plays it to laughs, which is not necessarily a bad thing because Juno, for the most part, is a genuinely enjoyable film.
One of the main reasons is because the character is easy to fall in love with. Juno is precocious, fun to be around and displays an infectious optimism. She hangs out with a married man discussing Sonic Youth and classic gore.
Another reason is the soundtrack, which features a couple of laid-back indie-rock and pop selections that fit the film’s mood.
Diablo Cody is exceptional in her debut as scriptwriter. The dialogue is witty and efficient, especially the wry non-sequiturs. Jason Reitman directs “Juno” with gusto – a sentiment utterly lacking in his 2006 feature, “Thank You for Smoking.”
Ellen Page delivers an engaging performance. Page brings a vivacity to the role that is invigorating. The supporting cast of Jennifer Garner and Michael Cera round out the wonderful piece of acting.
Unfortunately, Juno’s main defect is that the characters function as types. Hence, life-changing decisions get treated haphazardly because the characters are not expected to act realistically.
Take as an example Mark Loring’s announcement that he will move out of the house. No one expects drum rolls, but the surprise arrives in a deflated air – an action made to appear inevitable. Or take Juno telling her parents about her pregnancy. That was a funny moment, but that was about all it was.
Surprisingly, Juno is not ostracized during the pregnancy. As a girl, while she might have been frightened of her parents, she should have been scared of schoolmates rejecting her.
Instead of showing this confrontation of wills, this societal rejection of a leper, the director and writer sidestep by blacking out the school, limiting the viewers to a couple of shots of Juno walking through a corridor. It almost seems the pregnancy is just a state of mind with no basis in reality. Or as Bill Clinton might have put it, a fairy tale.
This is the most significant reason the film is not pro-life. It strains belief that a girl could keep a baby only because she found an abortion clinic incommodious.
“Juno” is a harmless delight, but in retrospect, it is a scantily sketched picture. On closer inspection, it fails to say anything significant about the travails of a pregnant 16-year-old, the effect of the pregnancy on her family or the difficulties in securing an adoption. Its success lies in keeping audiences entertained for 90 minutes; after that time, its hold on the mind wanes.
—-
Contact Freke Ette at [email protected]