Amy's OrgasmReviewed By Thom
Posted 08/27/02 05:19:44
Do not even try to understand how a woman who writes about female liberation can suddenly fall for a sleazy, womanizing shock jock who embarrasses her and invalidates her on the air. Since Amy, she of the orgasm, is masochistic enough to step into the role of victim and somehow find solace there, I suppose the movie as a whole wouldn’t mind pulling the same trick.Julie Davis (creator of this beyond words, and I mean that in a bad way, farce) makes her acting debut as Amy. Her performance felt ingenuine. I know critics bandy that word around a lot so let me explain what I mean. I just didn’t buy it. I didn’t buy into the premise and the character was so wormy, so measly, so much smaller than what you would want the author of a self-help book to be that just watching the two sides of Amy was painful. Davis played the role straight. It wasn't a satire. You would think it would be satire. As in, "She's got to be kidding, right?"
The films Neanderthal approach to male/female relationships aren't just insulting, but angering. How did a woman who is so ill-suited to understand the issues she is writing about even get a book deal in the first place? Her advice to women? Shut your legs and get a job. Um. Okay. So you’ve got a set-up were sexual repression could be the big pay off. The Orgasm. But then she falls for a guy who is equally two-sided. A misogynistic shock jock named Mathew Starr (Nick Chinlund) who is secretly a sensitive, caring, new-age guy? What could this movie possibly be saying to real women? Give it up sister. Chuck those shoes out the winder’ and git yerslef knocked up.
Help me out here, people. If the characters were so completely dishonest, if their public appearance was simply a money-making sham, then how I am supposed to sympathize with their deeper emotional needs when I’ve already got them both pegged as small-minded, manipulative opportunists.
So now that neither of these characters have any integrity whatsoever, the rest of the movie was just series of annoying turn of events where they fall in love with each other and I endured it just to tell you how bad it was. It wasn’t even fun to watch in a train wreck kind of a way.
Davis was hailed by New York Times critic Janet Maslin as the “the female Woody Allen.” If she means making painfully self-conscious, neurotic and repressed films where Woody, a tiny, unappetizing man, always gets laid, then okay, this is a movie like that – where the impossible happens in a stomach-churning way. If what she really meant was, “… You couldn’t pay me ENOUGH to say you are the female Woody Allen …,” then okay, I believe it.
Amy’s Orgasm is the most unspectacular piece of garbage I have ever laid my eyes too. Anyone who calls this film “post-feminist” is completely missing the point of life after feminism. It doesn’t mean a return to trading sex for survival. It means transcending that duality. There is nothing worse than watching the hunt for tail, as if its really that complicated. Mathew Starr is a predator who sees a difficult catch. Amy lets herself be caught but only in a way that doesn’t step over her supposed “rules” about dating. Her publicist frets about her public image.Obviously Amy has some seriously unresolved issues and ones that completely destroy her credibility. It’s just disgusting to see Starr’s chief opponent privately capitulate to his lack of values or ethics in a conspiracy to maintain their shared wealth and power as media figures. Throw this one in the dumper and forget all about it. Only an asshole would like this movie.
|© Copyright HBS Entertainment, Inc.|