Julie & Julia (2009)

Directed by: Nora Ephron | 123 minutes | comedy | Actors: Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Stanley Tucci, Chris Messina, Linda Emond, Helen Carey, Mary Lynn Rajskub, Jane Lynch, Joan Juliet Buck, Crystal Noelle, George Bartenieff, Vanessa Ferlito, Casey Wilson, Jillian Bach, Andrew Garman, Michael Brian Dunn, Remak Ramsay, Diane Kagan, Pamela Holden Stewart

‘Julie & Julia’ is actually a movie that shouldn’t work. The fact that the film still does this to a reasonable extent is almost entirely due to the performance of Meryl Streep, although there is also something to be said about this. It’s not that her storyline is the most interesting in terms of content – ​​rather the opposite is the case – but Streep does manage to transcend the less remarkable events in the film with her own hands. With her comical, but always authentic-looking interpretation of the idiosyncratic and immensely popular TV chef Julia Child in America, she gives the structurally problematic and dramatically tame ‘Julie & Julia’ the necessary flair. Sadly not enough to save the film, but it comes a long way.

With her high intonations and flamboyant behavior during her cooking classes, Julia Child is an ideal person for parody – as a hilarious sketch by Dan Aykroyd in “Saturday Night Live” has also shown – but Streep should try to get as close as possible to the woman in question. to stay. The intention is not to ridicule Child, but to make a real woman of flesh and blood. And she succeeds surprisingly well. Of course, Streep is a top-class actress, but given the emphasis still placed on the humor that comes from her interactions with other women and chefs – always being the odd one out with her dry remarks or overly positive attitude – it is remarkable that she always continues to appear real and Streep can never be caught winking or self-conscious in her playing. She is also not always the eternal sunshine in the house and also hints at moments when she is bored or sad, the latter being especially visible when the conversation is about children, whom she desperately wants but apparently cannot have with her husband.

However, this dramatic element does not get much place in her life, which, apart from the possible publication of her cookbook, actually knows no conflict at all. Although her cooking teacher in France is against her and writing and publishing with her two partners is more difficult than expected, the viewer is not really worried about this. Partly because he already knows how it ends. Julia Child’s book, “The Art of French Cooking”, will come, as the viewer knows with absolute certainty from the presence of the parallel, more recent storyline with the Julie from the title (Amy Adams), who will continue working in a year and will keep a blog about it. Since there isn’t much startling happening in Child’s life, it’s a good thing Streep’s portrayal is so entertaining. She demands all the attention and almost immediately puts a smile on the face of the viewer when she appears on screen. However, this performance, no matter how nice, gets a bit boring after a while. Especially that high-pitched voice could get on the nerves. She seems to be somewhat closer to Dan Aykroyd’s parody than to Child herself, and is also strongly reminiscent of Hyacinth Bucket (or Bouquet, as she would like to see it herself) in the English comedy series “Keeping Up Appearances”.

In short, the drama leaves a bit to be desired. Director and writer Nora Ephron tries to solve this by putting some conflict into the story of Julie, who is blogging about her heroine Child’s dishes and completely absorbed in it. However, the argument with her husband is too fleeting and artificial to make an impression. At the beginning of the film, Julie is contrasted with her friends, who are only concerned with themselves, their image, and their busy schedules, but she herself appears not to be much different from them when she only has an eye for her blog and the many (virtual) visitors she gets. Adams does her best and is often quite charming and comical – in situations and dialogue that are very similar to the Ephron screenplay of ‘When Harry Met Sally’, right down to the facial expressions (a shy, tear-eyed smile on the end of the movie reminds me exactly of Sally Albright). But even here the story ends up being too flat. Beyond the hasty conflict with hubby, everything revolves around cooking the dishes and meeting her own deadline. The creators could have done a lot more with this story. What exactly does Julia’s book do to Julie – also outside the kitchen and her apartment – ​​and what personality traits does she have, apart from the obsession for Child shown here, and a love for cooking and good food? Unfortunately, the ending is also anticlimactic. The structure of the parallel storylines and Julie’s constant desire to meet Child suggests that the two ladies—and thus the two independent storylines—will meet at the end, but such a meeting never materializes. Child does react indirectly to Julie’s blog and this could potentially see an opening for interesting drama – especially because it is a negative statement – but here too little is done, for fear perhaps, of an atmosphere that is too depressed or contemplative . In the end, for example, too many loose ends and light-hearted solutions were devised to really be able to speak of a successful film.