User Reviews

This little independent drama written and directed by Bradley Rust Gray definitely has a niche audience. Made on a shoestring budget and filmed "guerilla style" on location in New York City. It seems to be a throwback to the 1970s when these kinds of movies were made more frequently by people like by John Cassavetes, Bob Rafelson, and others Zoe Kazan plays Ivy, a basic girl next door type who is home for spring break. Al (Mark Rendall), a childhood friend, asks to stay with her and her mom as he has nowhere else to go. Their relationship is like any other boy-girl "friends" situation. It can be awkward and strange at times, and there are moments when you think there could be something more going on. This is pretty much the entire story in a nutshell. Zoe is above all "real and honest" in her portrayal of Ivy, who also suffers from epilepsy. She has a boyfriend back at school (Greg), but when he is involved in car accident with an old girlfriend as a passenger, their relationship is the next victim. This is one of "those" movies that are heavy on feeling and atmosphere. Its structure is plot less and meandering, but you really can't seem to pull your eyes away from the screen as these characters really start to grow on you. There is no music or score to the film and many of the scenes are filmed at a distance, letting the characters interact with there real environments. The authentic feel of this film really puts it at a different level than most films. Nothing feels forced or made up to serve a greater good, things happen and the characters react. The people at Oscilloscope have put out a DVD package that is available, but I would first recommend seeing it on Netflix watch instantly.

Like I said at the beginning this movie is really aimed at a very specific audience but if you're ready to disconnect from a summer full of CGI Robots, Aliens, and big budget garbage, give the Exploding Girl a try and thank me in the morning.

I won't say that Exploding Girl was more accessible down here in Brazil than it was in its home country, but I had the distinct advantage of watching it not merely as entertainment or a time-killer but as news from frontlines at which new technologies cross with an evolving emotional tone and evolving mores and the technology gives the emotional tone and the mores impetus.

(1) As one of the last people in the world not to use a cell phone, I was pleased to see evidence to support my lingering suspicion that most cell phone communication is merely to "check in" — I think that was the language of the movie itself — and to provide reassurance that the caller will call again later, again to check in, again to provide reassurance of yet another call to check in later still and so on, I assume, ad infinitum unto death.

2) But that's not really the whole of it. The constant cell phoning back and forth seems also to be necessary for purposes of temperature taking. First, there's the toneless "How are you?" and then an affectless, seemingly obligatory "I'm okay, how are you?" and then a further affectless "I'm okay" at the other end. Then it's allowed that the call has been just to check in and there will be another call just to check in later. But maybe it's not just the checking-in that's important but the taking of emotional temperature and the reassurance that everything is on an even keel, that no one's lurching too far out of the "okay" range, no one's getting either too hot and bothered or too chilly or cold and thereby threatening to tumble off into catatonia. And, if this is the case, then the constant checking in and temperature taking helps to hold people in the "okay" range. What do you think? Do I have this anything like right?

(3) How mannerly these young people are, within of course the parameters of their evolving manners! How solicitous they are of each other! How caring! Greg has taken up with an old girlfriend during a summer away from his current girlfriend. He calls the current girlfriend up to break it to her. He does it unshirkingly, with no more trepidation or embarrassment than if he were calling to tell her he's held up in traffic and he's going to be ten minutes late to dinner. And then he calls again later to make sure she's okay. And she has of course told him in response to the initial announcement of his calling it quits that everything is okay, everything is fine, and now everything is still fine. Reminds me of something John Updike had Rabbit observe in one of the Rabbit novels, probably Rabbit Is Rich, namely, that these young people are operating at a lower sexual temperature than his generation operated at. And then there is, in this movie, the lifelong friend Al, who wonders aloud to Ivy if their relationship might not possibly develop beyond the palsiness that has so far been its outer limit and, when she doesn't immediately fall into his arms, he apologizes for possibly rocking the boat, threatening the equilibrium of things. Friendship and . . . something more than friendship — if this movie is to be believed, and in this respect it seems credible enough, the boundaries I speak of are blurring to the vanishing point. But, then, you guys up there in the U.S. already know all this stuff about the way relationships are evolving. You're not learning anything new from this movie. I am learning from it, I am learning a lot from it, and that's why I hold the movie dear.

College can be a rough time, even for those who are 100% healthy. In this case, we have a protagonist with epilepsy. She's trying to find love that eludes her time and time again.

I like films like this that look almost like hidden camera footage. When a girl and her roommate stay up watching TV, hanging off the couch talking about life, you are among them. It's really a hard time when you're out of high school in your early years of adulthood. You want the job, the enjoyment, and the love that culture promises and yet, it doesn't translate that way.

We see a girl who is stuck in unrequited love, trying to improve a relationship tat is sadly one-sided. When one is new at love, there is so much that has to be learned the hard way. Then, there is the "Ducky" type of friend who shares her apartment. Is their friendship destined to stay platonic or will it grow into a sexual thing.

Thes are the basic elements of this film. My wife thought it dragged on a bit. I, on the other hand, liked the mysterious ether-like feeling of the film. For me, it was a peering into the life of a brave young girl with no answers. I found it inspiring in an odd way. Maybe because I don't yet have the answers and I felt for her in that stage of life. I recommend it as a thoughtful romantic drama.

The star of 'The Exploding Girl' is Zoe Kazan, granddaughter of Elia Kazan, the legendary director. It helps that Elia Kazan was Zoe's grandfather, as I'm sure it's helped her career. Nonetheless, I understand she's a pretty good actor irregardless of her famous surname. But here, in 'The Exploding Girl' she has virtually nothing to do.

'The Exploding Girl' is up for a Spirit Award in the 'John Cassavetes Award' category (features made for under a budget of $500,000). It's similar to another Spirit Award nominee, 'Tiny Furniture', as they are both about a young college-aged female back at home from school, who have both platonic and romantic relationships with young men. Kazan plays Ivy who gets a call from her friend Al, whose parents have just rented his room out, and finds himself with nowhere to stay. The circumstances of this 'mixup' by Al's parents are unclear and the specious explanation provided by the film's writer/director, Bradley Rust Gray, appears nothing more than a weak plot device to place Ivy and Al in close proximity to one another.

Al is a sensitive guy but I'm unable to remember much about him. Oh yes, he takes Ivy to a rooftop where pigeons are being bred and there are some nice shots of the platonic couple gazing skyward at a flock of birds (pigeons?) flying in the sky. The rest of the Exploding Girl plot concerns Ivy being dumped by her boyfriend, Greg, who we never see on screen. In fact, the entire Ivy-Greg relationship is depicted through a series of cell phone conversations!

One shallow internet poster has asserted that American films focus on plot and Indie films are more like foreign ones—i.e., character driven. In this poster's mind, 'art' films don't have to have much of a plot and the mere presentation of 'sensitive' characters is enough to award accolades to such films as 'The Exploding Girl'. As a fledging screenwriter myself, I can say without hesitation that 'plot' is the most difficult aspect of a screenplay to develop. You can have all the great characters in the world but if you don't have a dynamic, original plot, your film might get off the ground, but it will never soar!

I realized that 'The Exploding Girl' was going to be slow-moving after watching the first ten minutes. However, sometimes there are slow-moving films which reward you with a surprising twist at the end. Not so with 'The Exploding Girl'. It's all rather predictable stuff when we discover Ivy and Al holding hands as the screen goes blank and the credits then begin to roll.

The film's scenarist appears to be a nice guy and nothing in this film is crude or objectionable. Nonetheless, there simply aren't enough unique plot reversals to prevent us from throwing this film into the proverbial indie trash bin. Perhaps with more life experiences, Mr. Gray may come up with a more dynamic story. Certainly, 'The Exploding Girl' does have a few arresting visual moments. But as long as another weary 'lovesick girl bounces back after being dumped by insensitive boyfriend' plot is thrown our way, this film (and other indies films like it) might be defined in terms of what 'Seinfeld' is supposed to be really about: nothing!

I wanted to love this film. In fact, the opening was quite breathtaking with the flashes of sunlight coming in through the car window. I also liked the plot idea of two friends and the possibility they just might be perfect for one another. But, it didn't all come together for me. There was something missing from this film, and the more I think on it, I realize that the only fully-fleshed character was Ivy. Greg, who you never see, is flat and predictable. You only hear him talking to Ivy in broken lies over a cell phone. He's barely explained.

Greg's poor treatment of Ivy is supposed to be in stark contrast to Al, who adores Ivy and has known her since eighth grade or something. I got sick early on of the filmmaker pointing out how they seemed to complete each other with their sharing of a milkshake, pizza slice, cigarettes, earphones, and Al's readiness to come home whenever Ivy wanted him to. It was over-the-top, especially when early on a family friend mistakes them for a couple. I disliked how a conversation with Greg was often followed by a caring conversation with Al. I thought I could figure out on my own who the good guy was supposed to be.

Everything about Al's character seems to have been created just to highlight how perfect he would be for Ivy. His lack of a back story is troubling. Who is he? Why does he not have a place to stay (or, why was his room rented and because of that, no mention of his parents or why he's in the city for the summer)? I wanted to know more about him! Also, why was epilepsy important in the film? I thought this would be central to the plot and it barely is. Ivy goes for blood work that is never reported on, and during a grand mal seizure the camera is angled so that you see the side of Ivy's arm and Al's back.

In closing, though so much is hammered home in terms of how Ivy and Al would be a great couple, a lot of key details are forgotten, or left for the viewer to fill in on her own. You end up ultimately not knowing what this film is trying to say. I left this film caring no more about the characters than I did in the first scene. The filmmaker saturates the story with "look how perfect they are for each other" innuendo, but doesn't quite deliver in terms of other important details. Disappointing.

Websters defines exploding as "what happens when an explosion goes off" usually caused by the complex and nuanced relationships between various chemicals and elements. There is nothing complex or nuanced between the relationship explored in Bradley Rust Grey's Exploding Girl. I will go ahead and spoil the plot of this movie, if only to save others from the same fate that I suffered; Ivy (Zoe Kazan) gets dumped by her boyfriend, who we never actually see, but hear his monotonous voice via a series of phone calls (probably because he was playing XBOX or something and didn't want to be concerned with physically appearing in such drivel) and shacks up with her sexually ambiguous platonic friend, Al (Mark Rendell, the scene wrecking wussy brother of Josh Hartnett in 30 Days of Night). Ivy has epilepsy, which i presume is to draw some sympathy for her emotional plight kinda like how the old woman in the notebook had dementia. I personally would have found it more entertaining/believable if she had down syndrome. I feel as though there is a lack of quality roles for actors with down syndrome, and although the meaningless character study of Ivy could hardly be described as quality, it would at least be a step in the right direction for the acceptance of disabled actors. Anyway she has a bit of an epileptic spas out as epileptics do, again this scene didn't really add anything to the narrative, but I could strangely relate to it, as at this point I wished I had gone into uncontrollable spasms and hit my head on something so as not to watch the remainder of this pretentious garbage, but alas it weren't to be. Many of my loyal readers must be wondering, "why didn't you just walk out?" and the short answer is it was valentines day and I was trying to impress a date with my taste in independent cinema. In retrospect i should have just stayed at home and wacked off.

Peace