Julia Child (Meryl Streep), the famous chef (although I can’t say I know too much about her), finds herself living in diplomatic splendor in France in 1949 when her husband (Stanley Tucci) is sent there on a government posting. Julie, who is a frustrated writer and unhappy cubicle bod, decides to cook every recipe in Julia Child’s “Mastering the Art of French Cooking” cookbook and blog about the experience.

But that overview barely scratches the surface of the story. Both women endure joy and pain, successes and setbacks. And with scenes that alternate and twine between the two disparate lives, we come to see the parallels that Julie does between her and Julia for ourselves.

This may be the only movie ever based simultaneously on two true stories. The real Julie Powell really did do that cooking and write that blog (and eventually a book). The real Julia Child did write an autobiography and a cookbook that serve as references for the other half of the film. Fortunately for us, both stories are interesting in and of themselves, and the combination is very, very good indeed.

I was as much prepared to dislike Julie & Julia as to like it. What surprised me was just how very much I did like it.  I’d recommend it with no reservations whatsoever although I think I really would not have enjoyed this movie as much a few years ago.

Julia Child (Meryl Streep), the famous chef (although I can’t say I know too much about her), finds herself living in diplomatic splendor in France in 1949 when her husband (Stanley Tucci) is sent there on a government posting. Julie, who is a frustrated writer and unhappy cubicle bod, decides to cook every recipe in Julia Child’s “Mastering the Art of French Cooking” cookbook and blog about the experience.

But that overview barely scratches the surface of the story. Both women endure joy and pain, successes and setbacks. And with scenes that alternate and twine between the two disparate lives, we come to see the parallels that Julie does between her and Julia for ourselves.

This may be the only movie ever based simultaneously on two true stories. The real Julie Powell really did do that cooking and write that blog (and eventually a book). The real Julia Child did write an autobiography and a cookbook that serve as references for the other half of the film. Fortunately for us, both stories are interesting in and of themselves, and the combination is very, very good indeed.

I was as much prepared to dislike Julie & Julia as to like it. What surprised me was just how very much I did like it.  I’d recommend it with no reservations whatsoever although I think I really would not have enjoyed this movie as much a few years ago.

The romance centers on Tom Hansen (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel). Tom bores himself to death writing greeting cards when his true passion lies in architecture, and Summer is the boss’ new assistant. Tom falls for her the minute he sees her, and our 500 days have begun.

The irony of this relationship is that Tom and Summer are truly opposites. Tom believes in love and fate. He hasn’t been very successful in relationships, but he is not discouraged because he is waiting for “the one”. On the other hand, Summer believes that true love is a myth. In fact, she doesn’t even know what love means.

At the outset, Summer is clear with Tom that she just wants to be good friends. Reluctantly, Tom goes along with this, not because he agrees with her, but because he thinks he will be able to change her over time. This blossoming romance is presented in non-chronological order, jumping to and from all points in their relationship.

The non-chronological presentation is not the only thing that sets this film apart from your average romantic comedy. The script, written by Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber, successful combines both the comedic and dramatic moments. It achieves one of the hardest things for a script to do: to be funny and heartbreaking at the same time. In addition, director Marc Webb, in his feature film debut, shows that he can do more than tell a good story. He uses a variety of creativity to tell the tale, including split-screens, but it is all controlled. He doesn’t go over the top and the movie benefits from its 95 minute running time. It is the perfect length to tell a story that bounces around a lot.

And then there is the acting. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel are perfectly cast in this movie and their chemistry is truly genuine. Deschanel has already established herself as a solid actress, and she takes another step forward here. She plays Summer perfectly as a woman who doesn’t really want anything more than to just go with the flow. We sense in some scenes with Tom that she is capable of being vulnerable and committed to the relationship, but that side of her is never brought out. On the other side, Gordon-Levitt is not yet a household name, although he is sure to be there soon. He gives another solid performance in this movie, in a role that requires a variety of emotions, from dancing with a cartoon bird, to smashing plates on his kitchen counter. He has an incredibly bright future ahead of him, and he is probably licking his chops after landing a role in the upcoming Christopher Nolan movie, Inception.

To find any criticism in the movie, I would say that the narration and the opening credits sequence are a bit quirky and unnecessary. The narration is fine for the opening scene, but as it continues throughout the movie, I didn’t really see its purpose. As for the credits sequence, which features childhood photos of Tom and Summer, I just found it completely weird. It’s not as if they knew each other when they were children, and this movie isn’t supposed to be a true love story, so seeing their childhood photographs just didn’t do anything for me.

However, these are minor faults, and the film is still completely worth seeing. From top to bottom, from the acting to the script, it’s one of the most charming films of the summer. For anyone who appreciates originality, 500 Days of Summer is definitely a must-see.

This is Greg Mottola’s next film after his breakout hit “Superbad,” and audiences are likely to draw comparisons. I can tell you the general consensus: “Superbad” this is not. I’ll admit that Superbad also had a rather formulaic premise, but something in the execution of that film puts it a few hefty steps ahead of this one.

The acting, while good but does not have the charisma of the Michael Cera & Jonah Hill duo. Nor is the romance completely fresh: despite good actors and realistic portrayals, it seems to fall into some of the old genre favorites–the inevitable fight followed by the inevitable reunion.

That said I did enjoy the film. It’s good for laughs and a bit of the old feel-good familiarity in which we all like to indulge once in a while. Oh the 80s soundtrack is pretty cool too!

The first part of the film obviously introduced the main character (Eric Bana), his condition, and the love interest. This was done very cleverly, as she had known him for many years, but it was the first time he had met her. This is because it was an older version of him that travelled back to her childhood and earlier years. This broken timeline continues throughout the whole film, meaning that it could have easily been an incoherent muddle, but the director has controlled things carefully; sometimes following the traveller’s timeline, so everyone around him changes age suddenly; sometimes following everyone else’s timeline, so the traveller appears to suddenly age/become younger.

The plot was kept on a low level; no one has to save the world in this film; it’s just about a couple trying to live a normal life given the bizarre condition the husband has. The time travelling is played to various effects throughout the story; there are a few scenes of comedy, some extremely touching emotional scenes and some genuine shocks. A fair few plot twists come as a surprise, at times drastically changing the tone of the movie, but never coming across as contrived. While there is little to no action, the characters are certainly interesting enough to keep you in this movie, the cast played their parts perfectly; most importantly and everyone acts realistically which really adds to things.

The first part of the film obviously introduced the main character (Eric Bana), his condition, and the love interest. This was done very cleverly, as she had known him for many years, but it was the first time he had met her. This is because it was an older version of him that travelled back to her childhood and earlier years. This broken timeline continues throughout the whole film, meaning that it could have easily been an incoherent muddle, but the director has controlled things carefully; sometimes following the traveller’s timeline, so everyone around him changes age suddenly; sometimes following everyone else’s timeline, so the traveller appears to suddenly age/become younger.

The plot was kept on a low level; no one has to save the world in this film; it’s just about a couple trying to live a normal life given the bizarre condition the husband has. The time travelling is played to various effects throughout the story; there are a few scenes of comedy, some extremely touching emotional scenes and some genuine shocks. A fair few plot twists come as a surprise, at times drastically changing the tone of the movie, but never coming across as contrived. While there is little to no action, the characters are certainly interesting enough to keep you in this movie, the cast played their parts perfectly; most importantly and everyone acts realistically which really adds to things.