Tadpole

TADPOLE (2002) ** Sigourney Weaver, Aaron Stanford, Bebe Neuwirth, John Ritter, Robert Iler, Kate Mara, Adam LeFevre, Peter Appel, Alicia Van Couvering, Hope Chernov, Debbon Ayer, Ron Rifkin. Indie hit at Sundance doesn't always mean surefire instant classic as proven in this precious mix of `The Catcher in the Rye' meets `Rushmore' via `The Graduate': snob prep schooler Stanford (suggesting Topher Grace's lethargic brother) returns to his Upper West Side environs for Thanksgiving break to announce his long-hidden secret to his step mother (Weaver): he loves her. Along the way instead he's detoured into a troubling one-nighter with her best friend (Neuwirth, the true saving grace of this overrated film) who proves to be a problem with his desire to come clean about his notions of what love is. Weaver's talent is muted here but Ritter provides some much needed comic relief in one of cinema's best 'choke takes' ever seen. The biggest setback of this otherwise tedious debut by director Gary Winick (who collaborated with his writers Niels Mueller and Heather McGowan) is its anti-hero being such a one-note faux intellectual spouting quotes form Voltaire and pretending not to like girls his age (notably the fetching Mara) that one wants to ring his neck from frustration of his dreadful putting on airs. Why anyone would find him attractive is beyond me since he is a total turn off socially; speaking French only hastens the matter! What could've been a slice of a John Updike short story in its approach fails in its myopic assumption of creating a cult hero like Benjamin Braddock or Holden Caulfield.

Better and cleaner than Mrs. Robinson, however the themes are disturbing and even illegal or criminal. In Canada, the age of consent is down to 14, and that behavior may be legal here, if none of those adults were in a position of authority.

However, the story is well acted, and appeared to be convincing as a drama. A well thought out story. It is not a porn type movie and only french kissing was really played, and there was no nudity at all in the movie. That being said, it is given a positive rating here, because it is a well-thought out drama involving a socio-sexual taboo. It's rated higher because it's a good movie for debate and discussion on sexuality as a whole, and the other features I stated above.

What really drives this movie is the socio-sexual taboo of a teenage boy and 40 year old women in romantic interactions. It is natural for a teenager to want to explore their sexuality - which makes them vulnerable to sexual predators - and perhaps this movie shows that these predators do not have to be a sick old male psycho going after a school girl, but could be any female. If it were a sex addicted 40 year old man going after a 15 year old school girl, this movie would have been banned.

With subject matter that many might consider offensive (fifteen year-old boy in love with his step-mother and seduced by older woman), TADPOLE manages to be a charming, witty light comedy with a sensitive look at a controversial theme--a coming-of-age story with heart.

And its hero, a sophisticated fifteen year-old played by a twenty-five year-old actor (AARON STANFORD), is a natural in the title role, completely convincing as the impressionable youth living with his step-mother (SIGOURNEY WEAVER) and father (JOHN RITTER) in a fancy New York City apartment. Ritter plays the busy working father in one of his rare serious roles and is excellent, as is Weaver as the woman who discovers that her son has been having an affair with her best friend (BEBE NEUWIRTH). Neuwirth makes the most of her sly comic scenes as a temptress who awakens hormones in the teen-ager. A restaurant scene with the boy and his parents is a highlight of the story, where her deceptive conduct is exposed by Ritter's observation of an indiscretion in a mirrored image.

Witty and humorous, never taking itself seriously, it's an amiable tale told with deft touches and it moves briskly under Gary Winick's nimble direction with some nice glimpses of Manhattan's upper east side.

I've read some other comments about the poor film quality/picture quality of this low-budget, quickly done fairly short (77 minutes) film. Frankly, I'd rather watch Tadpole ten times than sit through the horribly boring technically beautiful special effects of either StarWars I or II. Tadpole captures the essence of interesting film making by focusing on the characters, the story, the situations; and it does so in a way that's doesn't parrot yet another low-brow TV situation comedy. Between the inspired writing, the well nuanced acting on all counts (with nary a weak performance anywhere), and the decent editing, I fail to see how one can complain about this movie from the perspective of it being an enjoyable mini-novella/romp through New York. Comments I've read on the weak acting I find unsupportable by any normative standard.

I don't understand the attacks that have been made on this film - not just on this site, but elsewhere on the web.

There are a few holes in the script, and the whole things is less substantial than a soap bubble, but it's still charming, witty and very funny. There are points where you feel they haven't followed something up enough, or explained something enough, but this film has better developed characters than almost any other romantic comedy you could name. Plus, of course, explanation isn't everything. In fact, sometimes, you're better off without it. A film that requires you to think, speculate or assume what might have happened between scenes - or before the film started - isn't that a good thing?

Much has been made of the DV look of the film, but I hardly noticed - and I like a well shot piece of celluloid as much as the next person. Sometimes, though, you just don't need the gorgeous, sweeping vistas of Lawrence of Arabia - and this is a small, independent gem. The use of DV is probably rather more to do with budget than laziness. In fact laziness would seem to be an unlikely part of the equation, what with the film being shot in a fortnight.

If the thought of a 15-year-old spouting Voltaire fills you with the urge to punch someone, this probably isn't the film for you. But how often does a thoughtful, not formulaic, intelligent, witty film come along. My advice would be to disregard the minor flaws and enjoy. 8/10