Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again: My, My, I Could Never Let You Go

I've always believed that most people do not watch movies through one set of eyes. You can't watch a Mission Impossible entry with the same eyes as when you're watching Finding Nemo (2003). There's a mental elasticity that comes with the viewing of different genres of film so that the mind can properly intake the story; it's characters and the world of the film accordingly. I am a believer that film critics must be capable of such mental elasticity if they are to judge and critique the quality of any cinematic productions appropriately. They must be able to put on a set of metaphorical glasses, dependent on the genre and set their expectations to a reasonable degree as the opening credits start to pop onto the screen.

Movie-Musical-Sequels do not have a long and lucrative history. People are still talking, or rather, not talking, about Grease 2 (1982) in 2018. There were talks of a sequel to Hairspray (2007) titled White Lipstick for several years until the plans were ultimately squashed. Therefore there isn't much else to compare Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again (2018) to other than it's richly entertaining predecessor. This film suffered much derision itself among critics early on, though audiences embraced it quite warmly worldwide. Is it the fantastical, bordering on ludicrous plot, the zany hyper-realized characters or is it just the sheer ABBA-ness of it all? Whatever it is, it makes people feel strongly, one way or another, and that means it's worthy of closer inspection and analyzes.

The story of Mamma Mia (2008) is set on the fictional Greek island of Kalokairi. Donna Sheridan (Meryl Streep) operates a hotel atop her beautiful taverna. She has one daughter, Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) who is the true definition of her pride and joy. Sophie is the product of Donna's whirlwind summer romance with one of three handsome (though questionably vocally talented) suitors. There is an American architect Sam (Pierce Brosnan), a British banker Harry (Colin Firth) and a Swedish travel writer Bill (Stellan Skarsgard). The first film unfolds as Sophie invites all three men to her wedding (unbeknownst to her mother) in the hopes of deciphering who her true father is. In the meantime, Donna rekindles her love for Sam and rediscovers her repressed jovial side, her inner "Dancing Queen" if you will. In the end, Donna and Sam fall back in love and marry, Sophie runs off with her fiancé Sky, without actually getting married and Sophie embraces all three men as her fathers. It is a tale of love in many forms, parental, romantic, friendship and is doused in sentimentality almost as much as it's wardrobe is drenched in sequins.

Mamma Mia has been associated with starting the skyrocketing popularity of jukebox musicals with Broadway and Film audiences alike, though hardly anything about it can be called original. The premise of its plot is borrowed from the film Bunoa Sera, Mrs Campbell (1968) and its songs are those of the global megastar 70s pop band, ABBA. How is it then that anyone could enjoy anything about something that is so blatantly plagiaristic? The answer is the presentation.

Mamma Mia presents itself as a story of a life filled with wonder and possibility, alongside woefully careless sexual endeavors. While many of its characters experience heartbreak and sadness at some point, the literal paradise they are living within never dulls or depletes in response to their despair. They remain inside a bubble of unapologetic optimism, a firm belief that life is a song that must be sung-through with the utmost tenacity and vigor until the very last note. It doesn't just present happiness, it insistently invites the audience, be it in a theater or cinema, to become a part of that happiness. This is why the "genre glasses" issue is so imperative in regards to these films. If one watches Mamma Mia (or more importantly its newly released sequel) with the wrong set of eyes, they are likely to be extremely disappointed and even utterly annoyed with what they see. Mamma Mia is not about logic, nor is it about quality. Mamma Mia is simply about the advancement of euphoria throughout all of the experiences life has to offer, both good and bad. After all, isn't that what ABBA was searching for throughout dozens of their hit songs? That everlasting sense of melancholy happiness. A contradiction in itself made possible by the pairing of their lyrics and melodies together. It is in my firm opinion that the sequel reaches that melancholy happiness and does so without apology or timidness.  

Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again may have taken ten years to make, but it picks up only five or so years after the original film ended. We find Sophie supervising a renovation of the Hotel Bella Donna while Sky is away on business in New York City. In the time between the two films, Donna Sheridan has passed away due to undisclosed causes, leaving Sam a widow and Sophie adrift in a crystal blue sea of uncertainty and fear. She wants to make her mother proud, even more so when she discovers that she is pregnant just as her mother was at this time in her young life. The film then intermittently flashes back in time to 1979 to show how Donna came to be the woman she was after graduating college, adventuring across Europe and seducing the likes of three undeniably attractive (though again questionably vocally talented) suitors. The plot still has a sense of carefree euphoria, especially in the early scenes of Donna's youth as her three distinct lovers woo her, but it carries an extra weight of somberness this time around, due to the loss of the hotel's owner and matriarch. Sophie's eventual embracement of motherhood mostly quells this somberness upon learning the true details of her mother's story, as well as the appearance of her long-absent grandmother Ruby, played by the incomparable Goddess of Pop, Cher. While her dialogue is wit-filled and her vocal performance sublime, I feel the film did gloss over her poor relationship with her daughter and the possible regrets she had over never making amends while she was still alive. Cher, a fantastic dramatic actress in her own right, would've pulled this off well had she been given the material. 

The songs featured are of course still that of ABBA but are a blend of timeless tunes used in the first film, alongside lesser-known (though still irresistibly crafted) tracks from the pop band's multilayered discography. The entire ensemble of the original film returns although with considerably less work to do on the musical side of things. At the same time, the new younger cast led by Lily James as Young Donna occupies the majority of the film's running time. James is a true tour-de-force embodying everything Streep made joyously distinct about the role and even managing to put her own stamp on it with her endless optimism and sense of innocent playfulness. She is naughty and nice at the same time, and her free spirit-ness reminds us of just how repressed Donna had truly become when we first met her in the original film.

The cast and many critics have lauded the film for having more of emotional depth to it than the first one, and this is true though sometimes it seems to be mining that depth with insufficient tools. Issues of this are most apparent in the present-day plot where obstacles are overcome simply because things just work themselves out without any real effort from the characters. Sky and Sophie's relationship issues are brushed over simply because he comes back in time for the reopening party and decides not to take a permanent job in NYC, but the reasons for these decisions are never fanned out. It can be argued; perhaps in such a film, they don't have to be. There is inherent goodwill in almost every character in the Mamma Mia films. They leave little room for antagonisms that are non-situational. People don't keep others from their dreams, life just gets in the way, and you must dance and sing around it. Also, the film's dialogue often misses the mark in comparison to the first in both wit and emotionality, especially when exposition must be hashed out with time to spare. The wooing of Donna by a secretly closeted Harry (Hugh Skinner) is particularly painful to watch transpire as is Sophie pretending to has out orders to the hotel staff. The film's emotions are best expressed through musical numbers like the humorously reinvented "Angeleyes" and the heart wrenching "My Love, My Life". 

The Meaning of The Meryl Mystery

Was it scheduling, lack of interest from the actress, creative choice of the filmmakers? Fans of Mamma Mia have been attempting to deduce for months the reasons behind Meryl's lack of presence in the second film. While some answers have been offered up since the film's release by its cast and crew people still don't seem to be satisfied for the most part. Mamma Mia is supposed to be all about satisfaction though and therein lies the problem, a problem that I believe is solved quite beautifully in the film's end credits sequence. Featuring the ensemble decked out in full on 70s disco gear the cast comes together, from both the past and present timelines to perform a rousing rendition of the song "Super Trouper". In it, Ruby, Young Donna and Old Donna take the lead as each cast member finishes the number singing and dancing alongside their opposite self. Maybe I'm overthinking it, perhaps it's just the way my metaphorical "genre glasses" are seeing things, but I found this to be a profound moment of messaging for Mamma Mia as an entity in itself. As we grow up, we change, and parts of ourselves are let go of, others held onto, and it can take a drastic event to occur for us to revaluate ourselves and reconcile who we are, with who we have become. I believe that is what happens to each character during the final song and dance number, they confront their former/future self and reconcile who they were and what they have become now. Why did Donna have to die? I'm not quite sure. Why did ABBA have to break up? Why did I lose my grandmother to Alzheimer's after her ten year battle with it and then lose my family dog, Bella, one week later? We suffer in life because that's just how things are. For every Dancing Queen Moment we have a Knowing Me, Knowing You Meltdown. Mamma Mia 2 attempts to express that sentiment in the brightest way possible. I do not think it is a coincidence that Donna sings the lines; "So I'll be there when you arrive, the sight of you will prove to me I'm still alive..." to her long-enduring lover and husband, Sam Carmichael. Death may be final, but music is eternal. It's what we share with one another as human beings in order to express our emotions and establish connections with those around us. ABBA could formulate a universal connection threaded throughout countless countries across the world thanks to their music. As the two Donna's hug their mother closely, we see a generational rift being mended. Mamma Mia and its sequel remind us that music is an inherent part of the memories we hold dear with the ones we love and care for, as long as that music remains no one and nothing is lost forever, not even a pair of glittery bedazzled boots. That's why Fernando (Andy Garcia in a humorously throw-away supporting role) can hear the drums, why Sam is sending out an SOS, and that's why Sophie is thankful for the music because it's what keeps life going. Mamma Mia is a heartbeat, and its sequel keeps the blood flowing so the audience can dance and jive to their heart's delight for many generations to come.

Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again is not and will never be considered cinematic brilliance. Some may even believe it to be a below-average musical overall. It is, however, an audience worthy entertaining attempt at reinvestigating that undeniable euphoric feeling that came along with watching the first film or seeing the original Broadway play. It makes the world of the characters more complex, even if inconsistencies are found through the weaving of that complexity, such as the questionable timeline between Sophie's conception and adulthood. It may not be lightning in a bottle, but it certainly has a lovable spark thanks to its soundtrack, cast and director Ol Parker. It took ten years to get back to Kalokairi, was the trip worth it? Ask your toe-tapping feet when you go see it in theaters for yourself.

Book Club: A Reader's Guide to Poor Comedy

If 2018 is the year of female empowerment, especially in Hollywood, you would imagine that cinema would reflect that on screen in some way or another. I first learned about Book Club (2018) by reading an entertainment magazine some time ago, which showed a photo of the four leading women on set together. The idea of a comedy starring powerhouse actresses Diane Keaton, Jane Fonda, Candice Bergen and Mary Steenburgen was beyond the dreams of any avid movie lover such as myself. Each of these women has expertly carried impeccable films and episodes of television on their backs in the past and continue to do so today. Together they would no doubt be unstoppable and hilarious. Well evidentially in the seats of movie theaters playing Book Club this year, doubt came to breed and breed it did. Book Club is not a flop per se, that would be too simplistic an implication for what has actually occurred here. Book Club is a missed opportunity of epic proportions in a time when female voices have the most to say in the loudest and proudest voices possible, Book Club says so very little in an uninspiring whimper. Age before beauty, but not before substance. 

Much like the reader's guides you find in the back pages of bestseller novels, I have chosen to divide this review into several questions that one may pose to themselves and others after viewing the film.

What are the "Fifty Shades of Problems?"

This film's first major issue comes with the premise that the four female leads select Fifty Shades of Grey by E.L James as the next book to read in their monthly book club. Reading the controversial content in the novel inspires them to reinvigorate their various love lives regardless of their ages. The use of the cultural craze of this book, which is already well past it's prime considering the horrendously ridiculous movie trilogy that followed it ended last year, instantly dates the movie in the worst of ways. Book Club will be remembered, if at all, as; "the film where those four big actresses read that trashy book about bondage." Why the writers chose a real-life book for the women to read, particularly a book as derided and unsexy as Fifty Shades of Grey is beyond me or anyone with a rational mind. It's an early example of the film's lazy writing techniques as the screenwriters didn't have the creative wherewithal to create a fictional book series that makes the women reflect on the place of sexuality in their golden years. They unquestionably could have come up with something far more sexy and sophisticated than the source material, a feat anyone with a sufficient talent for writing fan-fiction could easily accomplish. It's fine to want to explore older women's fascination with the Fifty Shades Series, but why do so in such a literal way that completely alienates audiences who aren't familiar with or don't care for the actual source material? In a fitting twist of feminist irony, the women never even state the novel's female protagonist's name (Anastasia) or discuss her sexual liberation. They just go goo goo over Christian Grey, a man so problematic his name should never be uttered on the silver screen again.

Who are these Women? 

Yes, of course, we know the actresses playing the roles of the four leads, but what of the characters themselves? The people the women portray all feel like stock characters from superior parts in their earlier careers. Jane Fonda is a confident, ballbusting industry titan, not unlike her character on Grace and Frankie. Candice Bergen is a powerful, no-nonsense judge, eerily similar to the character that made her famous on television in Murphy Brown. Diane Keaton is the cute neurotic she's played more aptly in literally dozens of her older films. Mary Steenburgen is timid and mild-mannered, even sporting an on-screen husband she's been paired with before, Craig T. Nelson. None of their roles feels fleshed out or organic in any shape or form. They play to type in the most derisive of ways. Life-long friends have much more interesting conversations than this bunch, regardless of the topic at hand. Bergen seems to suffer the worst, saddled with a character that is both dry and unsalvageable. While Keaton charms her way through the film and Fonda garners a few laughs from her typical brash humor, Bergen meanders, never quite settling into form. Steenburgen fairs a bit better, but only because she and Nelson have previously explored chemistry. It's not really any of the actresses fault, other than the fact they seemed to have signed on for a project without really considering it's incredibly clichéd and unfunny script. They do their best with what they're given, but first time director and co-writer Bill Holderman can't even manage to create decent chemistry between his four star-studded leads when they appear on the screen at the same time. The film is actually at it's best when the stars are working on their own, relying on old tricks to get them through this salary-chasing snooze fest. When they must perform together, the film's faults surface all too clearly to the top of the wine glass like a cork left adrift. They never congeal into an actual female friend group and therefore never feel authentic. They are representing tropes, not women.

What COULD it have Said?

The film's premise, though slightly absurd, does give way to several important issues being tackled throughout its two-hour running time. It skims the surface of the sexual frustration the comes with aging and briefly touches on issues like maintaining one's independence with rising age. Still, it never does anything of substance with any of this material. It's as if they are boxes being checked off on a list of things to cover in a film aimed at older women rather than just being about older women. It's a shame, but with a moderate box office income and several positive reviews from some kind critics, the silver lining may be that this lackluster feature can give way to more films covering this subject matter with superior skill and added flavor. Still, it's like choking on a bitter Zoloft pill when you think about the nearly unbearable missed opportunities presented in this film with its outstanding ensemble cast and potentially provocative subject matter. The film is like a striptease that never finds the full confidence to take its clothes off and hop into bed.

These women paved the way for millions of others throughout their groundbreaking careers, and perhaps this film is simply an example of them drilling away at the patriarchal cement with continued gusto. A movie like this would likely not have been made years ago and certainly not with this kind of respected cast. Still, both they and the filmmakers dared to give this narrative legs to walk on at a time when women are taking immensely important steps in this world, particularly Hollywood, toward something better. Book Club isn't the promised land, but maybe it's a ho-hum stop along the way. 

Riverdale Does Carrie: Why Musical Episodes Can Work

Riverdale, a show both lauded and ridiculed in regards to its penchant for nostalgia-bait casting and familiarly dated soapy plots found itself in rare good form last Wednesday in a season that was seriously beginning to lag. Musical episodes of television are used by writers and showrunners for many different reasons, often as a last-ditch effort for some decent ratings. Other times musical episodes are merely to showcase the talents of singular cast members who have duel careers in both acting and music. It has little to do with plot and more to do with audience engagement. In the case of Riverdale, however, it was clear that this injection of rhythm and jive was precisely the medicine the show so desperately required. As the students of Riverdale High are putting on their theatrical production of Carrie The Musical, suspicion grows as evidence of malevolent forces being at work to sabotage the production, and those who wish to be a part of it becomes unquestionably apparent. The episode deals with several current plot-lines running on the show, including the reconciliation of many strained character relationships. The episode is a reminder that when Riverdale embraces camp but maintains some semblance of substance, it can be a wildly entertaining program to watch.

The story, songs and characters of the Carrie-lore have such clear-cut connections to the characters and world of Riverdale that it is hard to think of a better selection the creators of the show could have made for their first musical endeavor. Carrie is about the frightening consequences of isolation, ridicule and sexual confusion. The characters of Riverdale have almost all been struggling with issues such as these since "Chapter One". Carrie's story also lends itself to the topic of archetypes and how they can be deconstructed by the choices we make as people, especially young people. Sue Snell, grows a conscience, Tommy forgoes a change of heart and Carrie herself goes through a metamorphosis from frumpy outsider to beautiful prom queen and ultimately to a Female Force of Reckoning. One thing Riverdale has made a great effort to do in its first two years is extending itself beyond the clear archetypes placed upon its characters since their comic book conception. Betty is not always a good girl, Cheryl is much more than a spoiled rich bitch and Archie...well he still has some character growth to go through, but there's hope for him yet. Carrie is a timeless cautionary tale, and the way Riverdale chooses to integrate the lessons carefully and moralistic themes present within it into its complex narrative is something worth applauding, not because it's something necessarily difficult to do, but because it could have come out so terribly bad and thankfully didn't.

Why Chapter Thirty-One: "A Night To Remember" Works As a Musical Episode

 1. Performers Have Talent

A musical episode will not get through its first ten minutes of airtime if the actors can't sing with at least a reasonable semblance of competence. Several Riverdale cast members have already showcased their pipes on the show before, but this episode had some surprising vocal champions leading the way. Lili Reinhart who plays Betty Cooper and Madeline Petsch who portrays Cheryl in particular impressed with their powerful, if slightly digitally altered vocals. Cole Sprouse respectfully opted out of singing, which is a common occurrence within casts of shows that do musical episodes. Thankfully though he is basically the only main cast member to do so and the writers found an organic, narratively-pushing method to keep him involved in the plot of the episode. When the cast is capable of rising to the challenges brought onto a television production by a musical episode, the results of their labors are likely to be more rewarding. See Grey's Anatomy's rather awkward musical episode "Song Beneath a Song" as an example of how limited cast participation can be increasingly problematic, even more so when their questionable vocal capabilities further limit the selection of willing vocalists.

2. Music Quality

This is not only whether or not the songs themselves sound good in terms of production value, but it is also a question of whether the plot of the episode can contextualize them well enough for a substantial amount of time. As I've already acknowledged earlier in this review, the songs selected from the Carrie the Musical perfectly situate themselves into the current plot threads running through Riverdale. If the song placements are incoherent and aimless, the episode will have poor direction and will likely be challenging to follow throughout. On the other side of the argument, good songs don't necessarily equal success either. It's easy to butcher a good score with a shitty script. The songs can sound like Broadway smashes, but it will matter little to nothing if they are poorly positioned and awkwardly executed. The way Riverdale's episode transitioned in and out of the "You Shine" number is an example of good musical quality. The song breaks in the middle so Betty and Veronica can have a brief conversation that on a thematic level allows the song to be reintroduced at the scene's conclusion, this time with new meaning. Rather than merely performing the song straight through as a romantic duet between previous love interests Betty and Archie, the writers of the episode wished to give it more significant meaning to the ongoing plot of the show and have Betty and Veronica sing a verse in order to solidify a recommitment to their previously floundering friendship. This gives the song and scene a deeper meaning, the music and the plot are complimenting one another rather than being subservient to either's needs.

3. Excuse to Sing

This may sound like a trivial category, but you'd be surprised to find how much some shows struggle with answering the basic premise of "why are the character's singing and dancing?" Buffy, The Vampire Slayer, incorporated music into the plot of its episode "Once More, with Feeling" quite naturally by having a demon cast a spell causing several characters to break out into song sporadically. Since demonic spells were a regular occurrence on that program, the audience was able to accept the inclusion of such a fantastical but, useful plot element without it feeling shoehorned in. Riverdale had the easiest excuse of all, putting on a high school show! The point of this all being, the reason for why their singing doesn't have to be incredibly nuanced or innovative; it simply has to exist. For what little logic musicals hold, they make up for with purpose. Every lyric, every dance move pushes us further into the world of the characters. That push begins with a catalyst, and musical episodes must contain a credible one before they start belting like Barbra at the Barclay Center.

The Highs and Lows in the History of Musical Episodes

(*From my slight bias point of view) 

The High: Even Stevens: Influenza The Musical

The first musical episode of television I can ever remember watching was on January 25th, 2002, and it has still stood the test of time all these years later. Even Stevens was a popular sitcom that aired on Disney Channel about an underachieving little brother in a family of respected achievers. This particular episode finds the overachieving character of the older sister, Ren Stevens sick with the flu, but going to school anyway to receive a Perfect Attendance Award and present an important science project. Soon after Ren arrives at school, it becomes clear that things are not in the norm. All of the faculty, staff and even student body are breaking out into song. Ren's ongoing fever is causing her to hallucinate these high spirited and catchy musical performances, ultimately culminating in her own contribution with the unforgettable solo "We Went to the Moon". It fulfils the criteria I listed above and then some, proving to be an ambitious success for Disney Channel and the star of the episode, Christy Carlson Romano. The channel increased focus on musical content soon after this episode's release. It might sound silly, but the likes of television shows like Hannah Montana or even actresses like Hilary Duff may not have found the same levels of success and stardom had Influenza The Musical not paved the way for them, first.

The Low: 7th Heaven: Red Socks

Here is where musical television came to die. Having aired on February 14th, 2005, I first watched 7th Heaven's cringe-worthy musical endeavor years later in reruns. I fondly recall being torn between laughter and lethargy as the Camden Family crooned to the classical tunes of Gershwin and Co in poor pantomime. It is truly a terrible hour of television smothered in sentimentality without the slightest regard for good taste. The actors don't even seem happy to be a part of it, and they are getting paid. Beverly Mitchell, who played Lucy Camden was one of the only trained musical actresses on the show. One must wonder if the reason she does not sing in this episode is that her clear talent would've only further embarrassed her extremely mediocre cast members. The episode is an insufferable ode to Valentines Day. Still, the only thing that is lovable about it is that it's likely to be forgotten given adamant time and substantial alcohol consumption. 

In conclusion, Musical Episodes are worth the viewing, if only because whether or not the attempt is successful, there is a kind of egregious satisfaction in watching a television show take on such a lofty challenge. As a fan of musical theater, I can only say that even the worst moments of musical episodes have caused even the tiniest foot tap in me, even if my head is shaking from side to side in horrid astonishment at the same time. Television should be brave and bracing, and nothing is quite as brave as spitting out a show-tune in 40 minutes or less.  

Love, Simon, Said, Marco

I had never gone to the movies by myself for the first 22 years of my life, up until this weekend. With a mom too tired and friends too busy, I took myself on a little personal-date to my local cinema to meet a boy named Simon.

Love, Simon (2018) is the first feature-length film featuring a gay teenage boy as the main protagonist with romantic aspirations, released by a major film studio. Many people wonder why it took so long for such an achievement to occur. Still, those who've seen the film are likely to forgive this cinema sin, because the result of years of waiting is so undeniably satisfactory. I sat down in my theater seat to meet a boy named Simon, but I soon learned that it was so much more than just his story told. Simon's journey is a collective one, and each person in his life impacts it in some meaningful way, as Simon impacts theirs. Yes, this film is a coming out story, but it's also very much a "coming in" one as well. Growing into the person you've always known you could be if you were just given a little push in the proper direction. Love, Simon is itself the little nudge of progress that Hollywood needed to catch up with a culture that's ever-evolving and ever-expanding.

Boy meets Girl, and Girl meets Boy is not the only narrative worth telling. Love, Simon has many successes, but its most historic one may end up being how unapologetic it is. Simon notes that "everyone deserves a great love story" but more importantly than that, everyone deserves to have their love story shown, represented and respected. In the span of an hour and fifty-five minutes, Love, Simon achieves all this and more with hardly a single blemish. John Hughes would surely be proud, but more importantly, millions of LGBTQ people and their allies are.

This is not going to be a very long review, at least compared to many others of mine, mainly because I believe that Love, Simon is a film that is better experienced than analyzed. The nuances in the young cast's performances cannot be lauded enough, but better we spend time admiring certain aspects of the film, that might otherwise get overlooked in other mainstream reviews.

Love, Simon crafts a modern gay love story in a world obsessed with technology, as Tony Hale's character, Mr Worth humorously reminds us several times during the film. While the plot uses FaceTime, Gmail, Blogging and Cell Phones as means of both communication and self - expression, it does not become subservient to these technological tools. Love, Simon will age well over the years, because it does not let modern technology over-power its key character-building moments or hamper its story structure with un-engaging sequences of character's thumbs fiddling away at a keyboard. They serve the plot instead of making it feel dated and disassociated. When you watch Breakfast Club (1985) or Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986), the 80s vibes are not diluting the quality of the work and Love, Simon is spared the same fate by being utterly charming; texts, blog posts and all.

The one glaring scene I found to be a weak link in the otherwise immaculate plot happens to be a rather critical one, Simon coming out to his sister. I could not track Simon's indifferent annoyance towards a sibling he had been nothing but loving and supportive toward since the film started. Furthermore, her reaction itself felt indifferent, and her tears unearned. I understand Simon's frustration at this point in the story, but it didn't feel like Simon would really share this hidden piece of himself with his adoring sister in such a harsh and hollow way. It was unsubstantiated melodrama in a film that effortlessly avoids forced sentimentality for the majority of its running time. I also didn't believe that she would have seen the post that outed him in the first place, which is what instigates the conversation because the blog seemed exclusive to high school students and she is clearly in a younger age bracket. The scene is just not as well thought out as Simon's later personal conversations with both of his parents. A film such as this can be forgiven for such narrative hiccups, though other's may find them as irritating smudges in an almost spotless story. Back to the positive end, the film makes great use of cutaway segments similar to Family Guy but with more context. Moments that take place in Simon's mind surprisingly speak more about our culture and conventions then they do about Simon himself, such as a funny, but thoughtful sequence dictating the unfairness of heterosexuality being the default sexual orientation in modern society.

In the end, I was happy to have seen the film by myself. It's hard to explain exactly why, but it felt more personal like I was physically alongside Simon and his friends as their lives changed for the better, and by viewing their heartfelt experiences, mine did as well. Director Greg Berlanti, screenwriters Issac Aptaker and Elizabeth Berger and author Becky Albertalli gave us a story worth celebrating regardless of sexual orientation. At the end of the day, you want Simon to turn out fine not because he's gay, but because he's an incredibly decent and loving person. The film reminds us to celebrate and encourage the goodness in others, so that our own goodness may itself be shown. Appreciating Simon's story, his struggles and successes made me reflect on how I celebrate and embrace those around me, and to ensure that I keep doing so to the very best of my ability. That's why I love Simon because, by the end of the film, you feel like he loves you too.