Amy George (2011) User Reviews

skip the second

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 12 July 2020]

13 year old Jesse is excited when his mother buys him an old camera. He is growing obsessed with sex. He reads in a book about being a true artist. He spies on his beautiful older neighbor girl Amy George. Then she ends up staying with his family.

This is a striped down indie. It is slow but it is engaging. The movie does need to start with his obsession with Amy sooner. Instead, the movie starts with two other girls. Maybe, the second girl should be cut out of the movie. The first scene is good shock and awe. Quite frankly, the first girl is given little screen time and serves well as the explosive first gut punch. After that, it should be all Amy George and nobody else. As for the slow quiet style, it's an artistic choice. Some people will get bored but I survived it. The more disquieting aspect is the subject matter. There are some very dangerous material being handled with kid gloves. It's compelling and also very disturbing in its matter of fact way.

Boring, amateurish, useless excuse of an artistic film

[nishant_100 · 28 October 2011]

I understand that there are many adults who watched this film. Great! I am a 15 year old kid, I had the good fortune of going to the Toronto International Film Festival. And fortunately my whole experience was not entirely tainted by Amy George. Some say that Amy George reminds us of a realistic teenager's life.

I don't know, who the hell the directors were, but my 13 year old highlights did not consist of what I just saw. Their lives must have been pretty boring to create this film. It is SO boring! Their film making techniques can not be excused. For god sakes people, they filmed a whole 3 minute long shot of the boy saying what he saw. Film is ALL about visuals. I didn't come to here a 13 year old boy say this: I see a tree, a rock, another rock, etc. FOR 3 FREAKIN MINUTES! It took them 30 seconds to establish that a teacher had a lot of books and was walking through a hallway... doing nothing but making sure they didn't fall. I was praying that the shot would end, but it never did.

MY GOD this movie doesn't even have a plot: Boy has photography assignment, boy wastes his hippie parent's money, boy attempts to be artist, boy talks too much, boy gets F because he handed in porn to his teacher, boy masturbates in washroom. What is that? Did he develop? Did he grow? Was there even a CLIMAX?! NO! These boys (director) wasted 2 hours of my life and one ticket from tiff... I could have watched Moneyball for god sakes! I am not a mainstream fan, I love artsy movies. THIS is a sorry excuse for an artsy movie!

Dull and Duller

[cwillard-709-882086 · 2/10 · 11 June 2013]

Not completely awful but really boring. No story, looks like ad lib dialogue, poor casting, filming is terrible, half the time super dark with no reason. It doesn't know where it's going and any direction it chooses, well it doesn't begin. Is this a story about a boy with a fixation on his neighbor, nope, is it a coming of age story, nope, is it a discovery of what it means to be an artist, nope. That sappy piano and ugly music at the end is really over the top, as though they failed throughout and had to somehow try to drive home some emotion. I wish I could find something redeeming but there isn't. It's sort of like high school budget meets every major cliché, but a collection of clichés does not make a film.

Derivative, pretentious, excruciatingly boring

[dcravit · 1/10 · 17 September 2011]

Another one of these introspective movies in which nothing happens and they try to save it with music. (The music track is actually quite good.) The coming-of-age set-up would be fine if there was an actual story here. There isn't. We've seen it all before - the dreamy shrimpy kid, the sexual longing, the bad girl object of his fantasies. It might have worked if there was a script. Instead we have far too many long scenes that come out of nowhere and lead nowhere, bits and pieces of story line, and gauzy shots that are presumably meant to invoke some higher plane of artistic intensity - all of which might be excusable as a pretentious but understandable excess in a film school project, but ought to have been weeded out by a major film festival that charges twenty bucks a ticket for what is supposed to be a professional effort. Is there a plus side? Yes - there are some brief moments of humor and good timing by the actors; the Amy George role is very well acted and the character carries a lot of undeveloped menace that the filmmakers could have zeroed in on to much greater advantage than following Jesse's fuzzy (and totally unoriginal) adolescent yearnings. Amy at least is interesting and a bit original.

A beautifully (and at times painfully) honest portrayal of teenage confusion.

[apycior · 9/10 · 27 July 2011]

I had the good fortune of seeing Amy George at the Brooklyn Film Festival. The film somehow manages to be both an accurate portrayal of Toronto (a city I've had the good fortune to spend time exploring) and teen-hood (a phase of life I had the mixed fortune of experiencing).

It's a beautifully shot film that (unlike many teen-focused films) resists going over the top, relying on the strong performances of their teen leads and strong script.

Overall, Amy George both stayed true to my memories of my time as a teenager, while reminding me of how complicated, difficult and touching that phase of life can be. I was surprised to find a film that achieve both of those goals and recommend Amy George highly.

The awkwardness of late childhood without the polish or glamor.

[alexaginian · 9/10 · 28 July 2011]

There is something undeniably authentic about Amy George. Considering how well-worn the traditional "coming of age" tale is, and the great expanse of modern indie takes on the theme, perhaps the film's sincerity is it's most remarkable feat. You might not believe every word a character says or every event that happens, but you do believe that this is what adolescence feels like. Amy George strips away the Michael Cera/Jesse Eisenberg glamorization of awkward and instead reminds us of how it actually felt to go to a middle school dance.

There is an undeniable gulf between the film's visuals and its writing; while the cinematography is approached with a mature artistry the dialogue is clunky at times and the story's structure prefers to linger rather than maintain a steady pace. Interestingly, the dissonance does not feel out of sync with the heart of the film. Jesse, the teen-aged protagonist, would seem completely out of place delivering the well-polished lines of Amy George's Hollywood-friendly equivalent. As every shot of the film displays, Jesse's Toronto is a beautiful place, but at thirteen-years-old he doesn't quite know how to express himself, let alone the beauty around him.

Any of the film's flaws are easily forgivable due to how delicately connected they are to Amy George's greatest and most satisfying merits. After all, being a teenager never really felt like Juno or an episode of Glee. We said stupid things, thought we understood more than we did, and for the most part struggled through the moody atmosphere. The power of Amy George is the ability to earnestly look back at that time in our lives without the taint of nostalgia and remember, or perhaps learn for the first time, the lessons those years bring.

An empty, boring portrayal of a bored teen boy

[dhnyny · 12 June 2011]

My brother took me to this film at a Brooklyn film festival because the soundtrack features four of his compositions. Nevertheless, about halfway through the film I found myself wondering why in the world I was sitting there watching it. The film tells the story of several days in the life of Jesse, a 13-year-old boy in Toronto. The filmmakers have nothing original to say about this well-worn topic. Several events or statements by characters feel unrealistic but not in an interesting way or for an interesting purpose. For example, numerous comments about sexual orientation and alcohol ring untrue. The biggest example is what Jesse chooses to submit as his assignment in a photography class, a choice with pointless shock value and no apparent connection to his character. The acting is uneven but the cast doesn't have much to work with, given the limitations of the script. The cinematography is beyond bad, full of pointlessly quirky shots that suggest the camera-work of a first-year film student who is just fooling around.

This is an exceptionally good film, by a sensitive and well-informed director leading a fine young actor.

[gilhardwick-46440 · 9/10 · 6 November 2015]

This film is right out of the box, carried not only by candidly true-to-type female antagonists but by Yonah's continuity and direction, both assisted considerably by Gabriel's fine acting ability.

Gabriel plays Jesse to a tee and Yonah and certainly the camera crew respond, but more than that Gabriel's obvious discretion, wit and intelligence add spontaneous mastery and authenticity to a pubescent role and character-type too often stylised, distorted and dismissed as such in contemporary cinema.

I left primarily hoping to see a great deal more of this very talented young actor, and on short reflection many more movies like this. The world will be a better place for it.