Pumpkin

Satires are not always comedies, just like comedies are not always satires. Examples: "Robocop", "District 9", "Starship Troopers", "Stepford Wives" ...these are all brilliant satires; yet they are not comedies.

I think it's misleading for Pumpkin to be advertised as a comedy. Sure, it's packed full of subtle humour, but like the films I mentioned above, its intent is probably not to make us laugh out loud. Its intent is to give us an offbeat look at society without taking itself too seriously. So if you go into this film expecting something "HYSTERICALLY FUNNY" (says the Washington Post), you might be disappointed.

Another caveat: this film is not about disabled people--not like, say, "Shine" or "My Left Foot". True, the plot is about a sorority girl who gets into an "inappropriate" relationship with a mentally challenged boy, but that's just a metaphor for what the film is really hitting us with. The film simply uses this metaphor to illustrate the screwed-up norms of human society. Pay attention early on to the speech Christina Ricci gives about how sororities & fraternities end up dividing us, labeling us and creating differences where none really exist. I believe that encapsulates what this film is trying to tell us about our world, and you'll realize it's a lot more than just a romantic comedy.

In order to fully appreciate this film, you CANNOT take anything at face value. Everything ...even the wooden acting or the melodramatic pill scene or the exploding car (lol)... is designed to be over-the-top, showing us a bizarre world and giving a little wink to the audience. Almost every scene will have you wondering if the filmmakers were being ironic, and that's the beauty of unravelling a film such as this. It's very subtle but well executed, almost like Hitchcock's brand of humour in Strangers on a Train which, similarly, pokes fun at the veneer of polite society hiding the screwed-uppedness beneath (in fact, "Pumpkin" has a tennis scene that's reminiscent of the tennis scene in the "Strangers").

I'm not sure if everyone will like Pumpkin but I sure did. If you're a fan of the 4 satires I mentioned in my 1st paragraph, I think you'll like it. If so, I highly recommend the Mexican film "Casi Divas" (2008) about a cut-throat talent competition, and the Spanish movie "El Crimen Ferpecto" (2004) about a man trapped in a department store overnight. Along with "Pumpkin", these are light-hearted gems that make us think hard about the human condition. Oh don't forget "Heathers" (1988) which fits right in with the bunch, though a bit on the darker side.

Julie Thurber (Marisa Coughlan) intends to lead the Alpha Omega Pi sisters to win against the Tri Omegas by helping mentally challenged athletes for the regional Games. Carolyn McDuffy (Christina Ricci) and Jeanine Kryszinsky (Dominique Swain) disagree with the handicap work. The perky Carolyn is assigned Pumpkin Romanoff (Hank Harris). She finds him to be endearing while he's in love with her. She tries to set up a double-date with Cici Pinkus (Melissa McCarthy) but it goes horribly wrong. She falls in love with Pumpkin horrifying everybody.

Its wacky satire is somewhat funny. The over the top sorority girls get a few laughs. It is Christina Ricci's absolute commitment to this character that truly sells it. She's hilarious. The love affair isn't given much preparation. That's probably the biggest problem. It's written as a given. Also I wish Pumpkin is a deeper character. He's a bit too simplistic. Nevertheless this is funny little dark satire.

Webster's New World Dictionary defines the word ‘retarded' as: 'slow or delayed in development, esp mentally.'

The movie's setup is certainly different from the typical ‘boy meets girl' formula. We've all seen the ‘nerd gets girl' bit. Well, this time it's taken to the ‘next level' if you will. The plot revolves around a stereotypical ‘prom queen' type of sorority girl falling in love with a mentally (and physically) handicapped boy, and how everything she once held dear falls apart because of it.

This is the sort of project that Christina Ricci has made a career out of doing. Namely, dark comedies. She plays against type insofar as she's considered a rather ‘edgy' actress, yet her role in this flick is that of the ‘popular girl'. A role in which is has obvious fun lampooning.

The subject matter would make one think that this would be a conventional straight drama, but it isn't, which is perhaps what elevates it above what could be typical tearjerker schlock. The film never takes itself too seriously, there's always a bit of ‘winking' involved. Take for instance when Ricci's character tries to kill herself by overdosing on Night Quill and Pepto-Bismol-only to succeed in making herself sick to her stomach.

However, while satirical, it does make good points on how the general public view and think about the mentally handicapped. How beneath the platitudes and seeming self sacrifice, most people still view them as ‘unequal' to the rest of us-people to whom mouth service is given, but true acceptance of is never a genuine consideration.

The way everyone turns on Ricci's character (her friends, her boyfriend, her parents) when it's made clear her feelings for her ‘special friend'-it's very poignant and very real (if not also very farcical). And one supposes that it's because of that blatant bias of others that make her make out scenes with said ‘special friend' so satisfying. She not only accepts him, but accepts him as a woman accepts a man. One has to admit, there's something oddly esoteric about seeing her have an implied sex scene with a ‘retard'. It sort of warms the cockles of one's heart.

‘Off beat' is the best way to quantify this film. It toes the line between full-blown farce and full on drama. Satirical yet genuine. And this is coming from a guy that usually avoids these types of flicks like the Bubonic Plague!

Surprisingly sweet dark comedy is really too sentimental at heart to be the edgy piece it was promoted as, and the curious final results show definite signs of indecisive filmmakers (two directors!) at the helm. A sorority princess living in a privileged bubble has her existence turned upside-down after forging a loving relationship with a mentally challenged young man, losing her friends in the process. The direction is erratic, and the tone of the film changes from scene to scene, yet it is certainly unpredictable and the cast is game. I don't know if the focus of the movie was changed midway, but the later sequences have a sweet nuance to them, as if a big softie suddenly took over to see this thing through to a happy ending. And then there's that final shot which, in keeping with the rest of the picture, is amusingly bizarre. **1/2 from ****

This is what happens when you make a movie without deciding what sort of movie you're making. Half of Pumpkin wants to be a an over-the-top, artificial satire like Heathers or But I'm a Cheerleader, and the other half wants to be a sweet movie of a shallow girl who grows from her experience with a mentally challenged boy. While it might be possible to make the film's premise work with either of these approaches, you can't use both of them. Scenes that are comedically exaggerated are followed by scenes of painful sincerity. Some actors appear to think they're in a satire while others think they're in a drama, so even individual scenes seem askew. The film probably would have worked best as pure satire, but one suspects the director thought the underlying issues were important and wanted to hammer them home dramatically. As a drama it fails because it makes no sense, Ricci's character isn't given anything convincing to react to; the situation is simply absurd. This is a classic example of failed direction.

Oddly enough, my girlfriend loved this.