Critical Mass: ‘Eat Pray Love’
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
For girl-type people, writer-director Ryan Murphy’s adaptation of Elizabeth Gilbert’s memoir ‘Eat Pray Love’ was the second-most-anticipated film of the summer (behind ‘Sex and the City 2’), but sadly it appears to be sharing the same harsh reviews that Carrie and company received in May.
Writing in The Times, critic Betsy Sharkey zeroes in on the problem: tears. She writes that Murphy ‘wrings all of his actors emotionally dry, scraping to the bone to expose vulnerability, but he hasn’t quite figured out how to control that power. So this gorgeous but messy affair isn’t always as satisfying as it should be.’
Meanwhile, the New York Post — it of the flashy headlines — can’t resist an opportunity to add its own verb in the title of Lou Lumenick’s review, ‘Eat, pray, hurl!’ Lumenick, no fan of the film, dings it for being relentlessly shallow and Roberts for being unable to properly convey the main character’s internal journey. ‘Any movie where the protagonist’s biggest problem is whether or not to split her time between New York and Bali is inherently going to be as profound as perfume.’
Despite the film’s chick-lit credentials, a few guys have seen fit to give the on-screen version a positive review — most notably A.O. Scott in the New York Times. Maybe he’s feeling a bit spiritually lost himself with the impending end of his TV gig on ‘At the Movies,’ but Scott wholeheartedly embraces the film’s quest for self-discovery. ‘Whether you decide to like Liz, and whether you approve of her choices and the expectations she has set for herself, it is hard not to be impressed by her honesty,’ he writes. Scott proves unable to resist the urge to add his own verb combo, ending his review with ‘Watch. Smile. Go home and dream of Brazilians in Bali.’
Mary Pols, a critic for Time magazine, was a fan of the book and of the movie. Though she finds a few things to nit-pick (no one gives it an unqualified rave), she praises the one thing even its detractors find in its favor — its beauty. In particular, she points out the Italian and Indonesian portions of the film, writing, ‘The food styling is sumptuous — I will dream of something I took to be a zucchini blossom oozing cheese — and the stunning locations include many of the places Gilbert actually frequented, among them Ketut’s house in Bali.’
FOR THE RECORD: Time magazine critic Mary Pols’ review of ‘Eat Pray Love’ was mischaracterized as a positive one in this post. The review was a mixed one. She was also described as a fan of Elizabeth Gilbert’s original book, which was incorrect.
Many critics were put off by Roberts-as-Gilbert’s air of upper-class entitlement and luxury problems. As Michael Phillips in the Chicago Tribune notes: ‘What glides by on the page can provoke unwanted scrutiny when visualized. Liz learns to assess herself outside her usual New York life and materialism. How? By putting together an exotic travel package of unspecified cost and unlimited personal payoff.’
The film’s 2-hour-20-minute running time comes under criticism by Mike Scott in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, who suggests his own final verb for the title: ‘Edit.’
And over at E! Online, reviewer Dezhda Gaubert, made up her own three-word review: ‘Sit Stare Yawn.’
— Patrick Kevin Day
Clicking on Green Links will take you to a third-party e-commerce site. These sites are not operated by the Los Angeles Times. The Times Editorial staff is not involved in any way with Green Links or with these third-party sites.
