The Sweet East

The movie follows a girl named Lillian, who, on a whim, decides to run away and embarks on a journey across America. Along the way, she encounters a series of extreme characters, each representing different facets of society.

Lillian to written to be as apathetic, opinionated, and jaded and for most the movie she remains this way. So I think Lillian serves as a lens through which we observe these encounters, not an actual driver of the plot simply there.

Interestingly, she remains largely unchanged by the experiences she goes through, which for me raises questions about her character's depth. While the diverse individuals she meets have profound stories and perspectives, Lillian's lack of development can make it feel like we're missing out on deeper reflections on these interactions.

This is why the story might have benefited from being a series rather than a standalone film. In a show format, Lillian could have had the space to reflect on her experiences, allowing her character to evolve in response to the people she meets. She doesn't have to change as a person because I think how she was written is also central to the message of the movie but there simply isn't enough breathing room in the movie, and there would have been some wonderfully emotional scenes if there was just the chance to.

Aight. So we're following Lillian who ran away (just for fun) and now she's getting mixed up with all sorts of people. We have some radical artists/activists, some alt right crowd, some actors, some radical religions types. So, I guess, this whole movie supposed to be like a portrait of the country. Or political satire maybe. In reality though, it's very tedious and obnoxious experience.

The main reason - Lillian. She's shallow, superficial, uninteresting human being. She's annoying and frustrating. She got nothing original to say. She's boring and she bored. And not really a compelling or sympathetic character.

Side characters are fine though, but it feels like their potential is wasted on Lillian.

Cinematography is also nice, but not strong enough to carry the whole thing.

This happened and then this happened and after that this happened.

In 1973, a British movie called O Lucky Man was released with a similar story structure. Namely, a protagonist falls from one improbable situation to another whilst passing commentary on the world around us.

In this movie, all sorts of 'thrilling' adventures befall Taila Ryder as she is led from one implausible situation to the next. An activist, ingenue, actress, thief, prisoner, etc. Until its disappointing climax.

Ryder is good as the nonplussed main character, the script seems largely improvised, the plot doesn't exist and the poor quality film stock and directing style made me want to shower after watching it.

It quite good with some reservations.

Just here to say I loved the film. The dialogue is well written, made me laugh and snigger throughout. Simon Rex and Talia Ryder got me glued to the screen. Now I'll have to follow whatever these two are starring in next..

The story of the Sweet East starts with a song, sung by a continuously sullen Lillian.. I loved the song and thought this was such a good way to introduce the audience to the character, because everything you need to know about Lillian is in the delivery of the song.

Then begins a 'coming of age' story, following this smart yet clueless, single-minded yet insecure girl.

It really reminded me of my own teenage self and the way I imitated people, took over habits, was intimidated by peers, had power without realising it, got lost, screwed up, was approached by men, used my looks to my advantage and experimented with it with zero care about the impact it had on others.. I thought this was the most realistic depiction of female teenage-hood I've seen on film in a long time.

Really hope to see more from the director Sean Price Williams and the main actors. Talia Ryder Simon Rex and Ayo Edibiri particularly are very fun to watch.

The 17-18 year old high school senior who is the supposedly "picaresque" main character in this flick is utterly obnoxious in her vacant, empty, amoral approach to life. In many ways she seems younger, more like a 13 or 14 year old perhaps who is worried about being seen as "cool" so she constantly degrades absolutely everything as boring. Furthermore, I recall at that age having ethics and even budding political beliefs, while Lillian blankly moves between anarchist, far right, and vaguely leftist groups with zero feeling or development of intellect.

A terrible incident occurs about 3/4 of the way through the film that is almost entirely her own fault. She is much too old to feign ignorance that the people whom she stole from were dangerous or that her bad behavior would result in significant consequences - in this case, death for innocent people whom she's lied to.

I don't find this film amusing, and the character isn't even believable as a young woman in her late teens. I have seen reviews comparing the effect of her character passing through American current events to Forrest Gump unwittingly witnessing 20th century history unfold in front of his naive face. However, Gump was a well-written, expertly acted, and ultimately sweet film about a kind but intellectually disabled man. The Sweet East is just is pretentious nonsense. Not even sure what the director was trying to say, the flick seems to hint that the film makers are guilty of pseudo-intellectual false equivalence comparing disparate 21st century American political views.