94 min
7.268
2017
USA
Lady Bird McPherson, a strong willed, deeply opinionated, artistic 17 year old comes of age in Sacramento. Her relationship with her mother and her upbringing are questioned and tested as she plans to head off to college.
Overview
Reviews
Innovator wrote:This movie was ok (it wasn't boring nor was it very entertaining). At first I didn't understand the point it was trying to make. Was it you can shortcut your way to your dreams if you lie, cheat, and steal (as that was exactly what she did)? It wasn't about the pressures of class division (as a review I read states), as no one treated her as any differently regardless of her social status and any division she felt was just in her head. Her anxiety against her parents, the school, and the upper class of her school turned out to be non-issues, and when she got to where or what she wants, she just finds that the grass never gets greener for her once she was on the other side. In fact, she just becomes resented by those she abandons to get there and ultimately ends up longing for the side she left.
If anything the movie was saying that those who are rich aren't as unexclusive as those without think, and they are just like everyone else. Just as the main protagonist was rebelling against her life to gain acceptance, so were the kids of the rich in that they are also just seeking acceptance. That doing anything to get your dreams won't lead to satisfaction as life on the other side isn't any better, you just end up hurting others by getting there that way, and in hindsight blinded you from what you already had.
I guess the movie had something to say after all.
★★½ - Not dull, nor was it very entertaining.
Gimly wrote:I think _Lady Bird_ is my film for 2017 where me and everyone else on the planet just straight up do not see eye to eye. At no point during _Lady Bird_ did I feel drawn in. I genuinely did not enjoy my time with Greta Gerwig's directorial debut. I haven't come across a single other person who feels the same, but I must be honest to my experience.
Normally this is where I would say something along the lines of, "It's just because this isn't my sort of movie" except that last year _Edge of Seventeen_ dealt with virtually identical subject matter and that was one of my favourite movies of the year.
So I'm just wrong I guess?
_Final rating:★½: - Boring/disappointing. Avoid where possible._
brooket123 wrote:This is one of my absolute favourite movies of all time. I understand why some might give it low ratings as it is directed at a very specific white female audience but all I have to say to that is "they didn't understand it". This is the ultimate comfort movie for me and I will take no criticism.
beyondthecineramadome wrote:Full review: https://www.tinakakadelis.com/beyond-the-cinerama-dome/2021/12/28/attention-attention-attention-lady-bird-review
The opening image of writer/director Greta Gerwig’s impressive debut, _Lady Bird_, is of Marion (Laurie Metcalf) and Christine (Saoirse Ronan) asleep together in a hotel bed. Their faces are close, like mirrored images of each other. Not only do they look alike, they are two sides of the same coin. It’s why they get along so well and why they can wound each other so deeply. This mother-daughter relationship is the crux of the story Lady Bird tells. The movie chronicles Lady Bird’s (as Christine insists on being called) last year of high school in Sacramento. She can’t wait to leave, and is hoping to graduate and attend an East Coast liberal arts school. She’s looking for culture, and Sacramento has probably been in her rearview mirror for as long as she’s been alive.
Nathan wrote:_Lady Bird_ is a fantastic coming of age story that is a lot deeper than its contemporaries in the genre. It deals with more than just boys and self-discovery, but familiar past, the complex relationships between parents, and the deep understanding that home is comfort no matter how terrible it may seem in the moment. It is all crafted so well that the experience is instantly relatable allowing many viewers to resonate with her. Despite this movie being a tad overhyped by many critics, it is still a brilliant film that is easy to watch and can somehow make me laugh and cry at the same time.
**Score:** _90%_ |
**Verdict:** _Excellent_
Louisa Moore - Screen Zealots wrote:Garden variety coming of age films are so prevalent that it’s all the more refreshing when something truly personal and original like “Lady Bird” comes along. The small scale intimacy of the story about a teenage girl on the cusp of womanhood in Sacramento feels raw and real, its cozy focus creating a universal anecdote that relives (with bittersweet affection) a part of life that’s filled with constantly fluctuating highs and lows. This is exactly the type of indie filmmaking that we need more of, and the awkwardly charming Greta Gerwig has hit a home run with her equally awkwardly charming directorial debut.
The film gives an unromantic glimpse into middle class life in 2002, where we meet Lady Bird (Saoirse Ronan), her recently laid off and depressed dad (Tracy Letts), and her hardworking, steadfast mom (Laurie Metcalf). The film is perfectly cast, with Ronan and Metcalf being the real standouts (the two are at their best when pushed into blow-up clashes between mother and daughter, an emotional tug of war between a teen impatient to break away from a hometown that’s beneath her and a mother so desperately hanging on that she’s unable to express her love and disappointment). It’s apparent the actors felt emotionally connected to the material while on set, and their performances bring a biting honesty and empathy to the family dynamics of Gerwig’s screenplay.
Gerwig has said the film is semi-autobiographical and she writes with an authentic voice, taking great care with her story (a story told with the hindsight of being a grown up). She brings a confident wisdom, an earnest insight, and a fresh voice through a witty and bright script that mirrors her true-to-life, free spirited personality. It’s as if the film exists within its own glowing aura. With Gerwig at the helm, the film has a particular hipster quirkiness written all over it, yet its sunny disposition and sharp humor is abundant with sincerity and avoids falling into the trap of being overly cynical or jaded.
The film is so observant that I could totally and wholly relate to our adolescent heroine through a realism that instantly transported me to the past. While I grew up in a different decade, some of the situations seemed like actual pages ripped out of my own high school experience. There are plenty of moments in a teenage girl’s life where the trivial becomes momentous and the momentous becomes devastating, and they are presented here with a poignant and compassionate vibrancy that I’ve rarely seen so accurately captured on film.
CinemaSerf wrote:Saoirse Ronan is "Christine McPherson" (aka "LadyBird"). In the final year of her high school life, she has to deal with all of the conflicting influences as her adulthood - and future - looms. She has a strong relationship with her father; a more torrid one with her mother - and generally resents what she perceives to be her family's rather hand-to-mouth existence in Sacramento. It's a tale of her emotional development, her boyfriends (Lucas Hedges and Timothée Chalamet) and of her journey to adulthood that is at times poignant, at times self-indulgent but unfortunately, for me anyway, pretty disengaging. Her character is selfish and thoughtless - although not unsophisticated. Like many a story of our adolescence, it is fascinating for those it effects but is little more than dreary hormonal stuff for observers. This is the latter, I'm afraid, with plenty of well trodden clichés to make 94 minutes seem quite a lot longer... Not for me, I'm afraid.
Wuchak wrote:**_Saoirse Ronan coming-of-age at a Catholic school in Sacramento_**
During her senior year in 2002-2003, a girl from “the wrong side of the tracks” (Saoirse) takes on the struggles of a challenging mother, friendships, romance and a school play, as well as the pursuit of “culture” and a college education in the East.
"Lady Bird" (2017) was somewhat based on the writer/director’s experiences growing up in Sacramento. She went on to fame with her 2023 hit “Barbie.” This is the first movie I’ve seen of hers and she’s a proficient writer & filmmaker, but her style turns me off somehow. It’s not just the few digs at wise Conservativism, but the overall writing and filmmaking, which failed to draw me into the characters and their experiences.
Her style just isn’t my thang, speaking as someone who appreciates compelling coming-of-age flicks, including artistic ones, like “Clueless,” “The Man in the Moon,” “Dead Poets Society,” “Little Darlings,” “The Virgin Suicides,” “Footloose,” “The Way Way Back” and “Fast Times at Ridgemont High.” Even spare-change Indies, like “Everlasting Love” and “Colossal Youth,” are all-around superior entertainments.
The similar “Welcome Home, Roxy Carmichael” had its issues, but it’s a masterpiece compared to this. I’m not saying “Lady Bird” doesn’t have its artistic appeal but, by the last act, I can honestly say I hated it. Odeya Rush as Jenna is one of the few highlights, along with Timothée Chalamet as the cool dude.
The film runs 1 hours, 34 minutes, and was shot in Sacramento, areas of SoCal and Manhattan.
GRADE: D+
