Reviews

A lot of the elements of Kissing Jessica Stein are clichés. The neurotic Jewish woman, the hip downtown woman, the Jewish mother, the New York setting (of the unrealistic Friends variety--hellooo, 28 year old copy editors do not have duplex apartments on the Upper West Side with kitchens large enough to fit a washer/dryer). But the film KNOWS these are clichés, and instead of avoiding them, it works with them and makes fun of the stereotypes it uses. Sometimes, it even shows surprising depth, especially Tovah Feldshuh as Jessica's mother. The dialogue is sharp and funny, and Westfeldt and Juergensen clearly spent a lot of time fleshing out their characters.

The problems occur at the end. This seems to be a problem of sexual-identity movies: Now that we've gotten the characters over the hump, how do we wrap it up? (See Chasing Amy for another good example). The writers seem to feel that there's a choice between a sappy Hollywood ending or a sad one, and instead, fudge it. The result is unsatisfying and comes off as `oh god, of _course_' (difficulties/characters appearing earlier in movie reappear to wrap it up--with no explanation of how a problem that seemed to be solved, really wasn't).

One of these days I'd like to see a movie that entertains the idea that we simply fall in love with _people_--and our hangups are simply about externals. Kissing Jessica Stein starts down that road, but ultimately, gives in to the idea that our sexual identity defines us, rather than the other way around.

My big problem with this film is its view of the haredim (`ultra Orthodox' as they're sometimes called in English). Amos Gitai was called anti-religious for this movie. I don't know if he is or not. I DO know, as a modern observant Jew, that this film does not nearly portray the complexities of women's lives in haredi society. It simply chooses to portray them as victims. There have been cases of spousal abuse, marital rape, et cetera, in the haredi community, but it is not the norm. What happened with the divorce is extraordinarily unlikely in real life, yet he made it seem realistic. It's very easy to paint a picture of a society as an oppressive patriarchy if you only draw it as a caricature, and that's what Gitai did.

As a result, the good parts of the film, such as the performances, are almost meaningless, because the film's vision is so distorted and one-dimensional. This would have been a far more interesting film if it had portrayed haredi women's difficulties (which, like in any conservative society, are real) in a more complex way. There are many fascinating stories to be told about the haredi community, which combines rigid rules with an incredibly rich family and spiritual life. Kadosh shows you the pain haredi women experience, but never the joy.

Please, if you have no experience or familiarity with haredi or even Orthodox Judaism in general, take this film with a grain of salt. It's far from all there is.

But it's still a good adaptation of Amos Oz' novel. Plot wasn't a strong point there either. It's the characters that make the story, and Efrat Lavie in particular does an excellent job with her portrayal of Chana.

Hard to find, but worthwhile if you like modern Israeli literature or film.

I loved Happiness--but I'll be the first to say it may not be everyone's cup of tea. It's so black I'm not sure whether it's a comedy or drama. Certainly, the 50s family whose father is secretly a paedophile is not exactly the stuff Disney is made of.

Despite the general lack of sex or violence (aside from masturbation) this manages to be a far more shocking film than almost any I've seen. The scene where Bill tells his son about his paedophilia is one of the best-acted scenes in cinema... and you won't know how to react. Cry? Todd Solondz doesn't seem to want you to love these people enough to do that. Pity? A little.

Go see it--if you're not the easily disturbed type.