← Back to Reviews
in
The Fault in Our Stars, 2014
Hazel (Shailene Woodley) is a young woman whose cancer has left her with decreased lung capacity, as an experimental treatment temporarily keeps the disease at bay. At a meeting for teens with cancer, Hazel meets Gus (Ansel Elgort) who is in remission from the cancer that robbed him of his leg. The two bond begin a romance, but Hazel's anxieties about what will happen when she dies--to Gus, to her parents, etc--threatens their happiness.
Okay, fine, darned if this one didn't win me over about halfway through.
I'm not sure whether or not the movie intends for us to find the characters, and especially Gus, kind of cringeworthy. But you know what? Teenagers are pretty cringeworthy, never mind teenagers who are dealing with some incredibly heavy life circumstances. It's not about whether I'd want to spend time with either of these people, but rather whether you can believe that they would be drawn toward each other.
A real turning point in the film, and where it started to really get me, was when Gus uses his Make-a-Wish to get a trip for him and Hazel to Amsterdam to meet the author, Van Houten (Willem Dafoe) of a book that Hazel adores. When van Houten turns out to be a total jerk, his assistant (a charming Lotte Verbeek) takes Gus and Hazel on a tour of the city, including going to the Anne Frank house. Hazel struggles to climb the steep staircases of the house that's lined with quotes from another young woman who didn't get as much life as she should have.
It's a well-worn trope in romances that the person with the pessimistic outlook is brought back to the world. We've all had plenty of manic pixie dream girls waltz through our screens. Here at least we can say that the trope is gender swapped, with Gus being the (at times overbearing) ray of sunshine. But whoever the wacky one is, this isn't a trope that I love. But I did appreciate that the conversations between Gus and Hazel illuminated a theme that I did really like, which was Hazel coming to terms with what life is going to be like without her.
The movie doesn't just focus on Hazel being upset at being robbed of her later years. Instead it focuses on her grief over the uncertainty of what will happen to her loved ones. Hazel holds onto the weight of a memory from when she was younger and on the edge of death. Her mother (an excellent Laura Dern) exclaims in grief, "I'm not going to be a mother anymore!". This anxiety translates into an obsession with getting van Houten to tell her how he imagines the characters in his book would continue after the death of the main character.
I thought that the cast was really strong. I was happy to get a brief hit of Mike Birbiglia of the chipper and very religious leader of the support group. Ana Dela Cruz brings warmth and humor as Hazel's doctor, and likewise Sam Trammell as Hazel's father. (Quick sidenote: Trammell was in his mid-40s when he made this movie?! What?!?!?! We all need to learn this man's skincare routine, stat.)
I did think that the film takes a little bit to get gripping. I also had a slight quibble with the subplot about Gus's friend Isaac (Nat Wolff), whose girlfriend breaks up with him right before he is set to have surgery to remove both of his eyes. Obviously Isaac is very hurt by this. But I thought it was icky that the film gives absolutely none of the girlfriend's point of view. Let's be honest: being in a relationship with someone going through this kind of turmoil and physical change would be very stressful for a teenager (boy or girl). And what's she supposed to do: wait until after he has the surgery to dump him? I feel like there's no way for her to get out of that relationship without being guilt-tripped and treated like a monster. Then we're shown her house and car as if to imply that she's awful because she's rich? If she's so shallow, why was she dating this guy in the first place? While not a huge part of the film, this subplot left a bad taste in my mouth.
Overall I thought that this was a solid teen romance drama.
The Fault in Our Stars, 2014
Hazel (Shailene Woodley) is a young woman whose cancer has left her with decreased lung capacity, as an experimental treatment temporarily keeps the disease at bay. At a meeting for teens with cancer, Hazel meets Gus (Ansel Elgort) who is in remission from the cancer that robbed him of his leg. The two bond begin a romance, but Hazel's anxieties about what will happen when she dies--to Gus, to her parents, etc--threatens their happiness.
Okay, fine, darned if this one didn't win me over about halfway through.
I'm not sure whether or not the movie intends for us to find the characters, and especially Gus, kind of cringeworthy. But you know what? Teenagers are pretty cringeworthy, never mind teenagers who are dealing with some incredibly heavy life circumstances. It's not about whether I'd want to spend time with either of these people, but rather whether you can believe that they would be drawn toward each other.
A real turning point in the film, and where it started to really get me, was when Gus uses his Make-a-Wish to get a trip for him and Hazel to Amsterdam to meet the author, Van Houten (Willem Dafoe) of a book that Hazel adores. When van Houten turns out to be a total jerk, his assistant (a charming Lotte Verbeek) takes Gus and Hazel on a tour of the city, including going to the Anne Frank house. Hazel struggles to climb the steep staircases of the house that's lined with quotes from another young woman who didn't get as much life as she should have.
It's a well-worn trope in romances that the person with the pessimistic outlook is brought back to the world. We've all had plenty of manic pixie dream girls waltz through our screens. Here at least we can say that the trope is gender swapped, with Gus being the (at times overbearing) ray of sunshine. But whoever the wacky one is, this isn't a trope that I love. But I did appreciate that the conversations between Gus and Hazel illuminated a theme that I did really like, which was Hazel coming to terms with what life is going to be like without her.
The movie doesn't just focus on Hazel being upset at being robbed of her later years. Instead it focuses on her grief over the uncertainty of what will happen to her loved ones. Hazel holds onto the weight of a memory from when she was younger and on the edge of death. Her mother (an excellent Laura Dern) exclaims in grief, "I'm not going to be a mother anymore!". This anxiety translates into an obsession with getting van Houten to tell her how he imagines the characters in his book would continue after the death of the main character.
I thought that the cast was really strong. I was happy to get a brief hit of Mike Birbiglia of the chipper and very religious leader of the support group. Ana Dela Cruz brings warmth and humor as Hazel's doctor, and likewise Sam Trammell as Hazel's father. (Quick sidenote: Trammell was in his mid-40s when he made this movie?! What?!?!?! We all need to learn this man's skincare routine, stat.)
I did think that the film takes a little bit to get gripping. I also had a slight quibble with the subplot about Gus's friend Isaac (Nat Wolff), whose girlfriend breaks up with him right before he is set to have surgery to remove both of his eyes. Obviously Isaac is very hurt by this. But I thought it was icky that the film gives absolutely none of the girlfriend's point of view. Let's be honest: being in a relationship with someone going through this kind of turmoil and physical change would be very stressful for a teenager (boy or girl). And what's she supposed to do: wait until after he has the surgery to dump him? I feel like there's no way for her to get out of that relationship without being guilt-tripped and treated like a monster. Then we're shown her house and car as if to imply that she's awful because she's rich? If she's so shallow, why was she dating this guy in the first place? While not a huge part of the film, this subplot left a bad taste in my mouth.
Overall I thought that this was a solid teen romance drama.