November 9, 2009
Motherhood: See It To Believe It
Motherhood is usually portrayed in one of two ways on the big screen (in my opinion): cliched or Hollywood-esque. Mom is either trying to get to a ringing telephone while the baby is crying and a pot of soup is boiling over on the stove, or she looks refreshed, polished and relaxed in three-inch heels while the nannies scurry about after her children. (Yes, I said nannies…plural.) I believe most moms fit somewhere in between the two.
Uma Thurman portrays a frazzled mom in the new film Motherhood, often cliched, but realistic as well. (Are all moms homely looking?) Thurman does such a great job that you often cannot tell that it is her.
In Motherhood, Thurman portrays Eliza Welsh, a mother of two living in a rent controlled walkup in New York. As a novelist turned mom/blog writer, Eliza tries to balance her blog, home, marriage and daunting to-do list, while battling parking issues, traffic jams, deadlines and strangers with messages for her on how mothers should be, in the midst of preparing for her daughters sixth birthday party. The film just spans one day in her life with so many interruptions; sound familiar? Also starring in the film are Anthony Edwards and Minnie Driver.
I would have to disagree with many of the poor reviews Motherhood and Thurman have received. It is a “slice of life” film and a day in the life of a not so well-to-do mom. It may not be cinematically perfect or brilliant, but it does cover the ground of what it often takes to be a mother.
Although Motherhood was out for a limited engagement, I am glad I had the opportunity to see it. Be sure to catch it on DVD (release date still unknown).
I don’t promise amazing cinema, but great one-liners about motherhood and laugh-out-loud moments that us moms can relate to (like crazy moms at the park, among other things).
Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly claims that “...Uma Thurman turns every task - shopping for a birthday party, retaining a parking space - into an operatic fit of neurosis.” And your point, Mr. Gleiberman?