woodcoinmagazine
Quirky gay kid fears his boozer dad and admires his arty mom... until he hits the age of reason and begins to see his life for what it really is: a surprise. At age 14 the protagonist begins dating a 35-year old man who becomes his step-brother -- one of many oddly engaging scenarios in this film which is based on an allegedly true memoir. Trouble is, for all its star-power and meticulous set design, the story lags and drags, becoming more about the memoirist's mother than about the lead character, who gets eclipsed by the zany shuffling of too many eccentric weirdos. As for being funny, it has its moments, but often the actors seem to be trying too hard to make the audience laugh. Kudos to all people involved for taking the story so seriously. And shame on whoever allowed this movie to over-ripen. Trimming 20 minutes from its running time could've probably salvaged it from the depths of mediocrity.
Theodore Keating
I don't really like the idea of comparing the book to the movie, but in this case I find it inevitable. I read the book and loved it, but the movie just doesn't have the same skill.... For one thing, the movie really downplayed the oddity of the everything that went on, which was really what made the memoir so detail-oriented and real, I think. But the people who made the movie just didn't have the same skill with *their* craft.... For one thing, it was a little off to cast an actor like Alec Baldwin to be the father, who had such a minimal role, really. It also seemed at times like too much emphasis was placed on the mother-- in film I suppose it's easier to place emphasis on an adult, rather than a child (a child actor), but the whole thing was supposed to be about Augusten....I really think they should have considered using voiceovers/narration by Augusten to give some depth to his point-of-view, giving something to his own narrations and insights like in the book, rather than just showing him on the edge of the scene.... Without that deep feel for the characters idiosyncrasies and the individuality of the memoirist, it's just.... boring. They just show flatly this one doing this and that one doing that, but there's just no real appreciation for how crazy it all was. .... It sounds stupid and obvious to say that it should have been more like the book, but it really should have been.(7/10)
tombrookes2007
RWS utilises a great support cast (Cox and Bening) to prop up a wonderfully weird ball of head zapping expression. The intense film follows a single child, ?, who is a young gay man left by his splitting parents in the hands of a wacky psychiatrist and his non conventional family. The premise of the film is a idiopathic mother that brings her son into a world of psychology and disorganised abnormality.This film was praised for its individuality, ambition and the few points that stick out as funny, but it is a grueling tightrope walk of a watch (verging between madness and genius). For me the film was just too wacky to be enjoyed, and whilst it has moments of amusement (I.e the mastabatorium) and clever observations into characters, it is too dramatic a drama to be credible. It was based on a complicated book and some of this was lost, but other bits captured and improved.
Russ
I think this is literally the worst movie I have ever seen. A meandering "story" about a bunch of 70's flakes too busy feeling sorry for themselves and popping pills to pull their own heads out of their asses. There was no one to root for. After two hours, I just kept praying that someone, anyone would die or be killed. I hated them all and they all got exactly what they deserved. If anyone ever tries making you watch this, RUN AWAY. Was I supposed to feel sorry for these people? I just hated them all. They were all a product of their own stupidity. Never have I seen a film so devoid of likable characters. Who gave the green light for this odious piece of dog waste?
