Watch Medicine for Melancholy For Free

That was an excellent one.

How sad is this?

Good concept, poorly executed.

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Medicine for Melancholy finds Barry Jenkins in his first feature as writer and director grasping for nothing. I can believe he was working from a script, though the feel and approach is closer to the style by the Duplass brothers and Andrew Bujalski and Joe Swanberg and those loose-as-whatever cats ("Mumblecore" to the critical laymans). What develops here is too little, and as a basic character portrait it falters because the two leads have zero chemistry. More than that, Wyatt Cenac is both miscast and misdirected; I can believe that he can be funny (at least in a deadpan approach and playing off of someone who can match him) since he was on the Daily Show and other comedy ventures I'd liked, but as the lead in what is ALL about behavior and character and is deep down a drama, he brings less than nothing in this tiny sliver of a slice of life about a guy who tries to connect with a woman he had a one-night stand with (and that she cheated on her boyfriend, who happens to be white, though we never see him, God forbid Jenkins allow some added conflict or emotions to rise)The two leads need to have enough charisma or chemistry or ANYTHING to keep us engaged, but they're given little by Jenkins (Cenac picks up a a guitar at one point, that's about it, the rest of the time he is either indifferent to Jo, played by Tracey Higgins), and they don't spark at all off of one another. Compared to them, Anakin and Padme are Michael Douglass and Glenn Close in the first act of Fatal Attraction. And it's not that they need to show full on sexual chemistry or anything like that (there is a sex scene but it's shot in all close- ups and done in a tasteful way, which is fine), but something needs to be there, whether it's dialog that can carry them to a place where we understand what draws them together or mutual interests and so on.We don't get to know much about these two people, aside from the fact that Micah is obsessed with how black people are portrayed in society and are seen in that way (in the moment of the film where things finally come to some climax as she calls him out on it this is a primary issue), and that Jo likes, uh, art, and thinks Bowie and Queen's Under Pressure is better than Ice, Ice, Baby because it's Bowie and Queen (Micah thinks the beat is used better by Vanilla Ice, nevermind that a white guy is using a beat for a lame rap song and the cultural appropriation baggage there). Even in the brief dip into a pop culture talk, the moment where we might see this man and woman not unlike we might be as couples or trying to get to know people, it's awkward and stilted.So what Jenkins gives his audience is a lot of these characters walking around, talking here and there, having a moment of sex, and mostly her telling him to do things (take a shower, get something to eat, go dance), and then the realization that (gasp) they have nothing in common. There's no insight, no enjoyment being with this couple, regardless of if the futilism Micah's doing is meant to be interesting in and of itself (this is post a break-up I think, it's unclear though, thanks MySpace reference).When a filmmaker announces him or herself as a major force in modern cinema with one film it's kind of a big deal, and not unlike Damien Chazelle did with Whiplash and then his follow-up La La Land, it's staggering to consider the quantum leap he had from Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench, and the same can be said here for Jenkins from 'Melancholy' to Moonlight. At least Chazelle had the musical sense already down even if the narrative was sloppy; here, it's like a character exercise that was stretched for far too long, and Jenkins and DP James Laxton (who also shot in brilliant strokes Moonlight) give this a look that should be black and white but seems to be more washed-out, like all of the color has been washed and left to dry on a clothes hanger in the backyard. Though Laxton gets some interesting shots, it's unpleasant to look at, and it makes it a tough sit due to the fact that the characters are unpleasant, or at least the reason they stick together is unpleasant.One full star goes to the use of Tom Waits' 'Lie to Me.'

Twenty-four hours in the tentative relationship of two young San Franciscans also dealing with the conundrum of being a minority in a rapidly gentrifying city.Barry Jenkins has described the film's two main characters as "playing out a debate back and forth about identity politics". Each of the two main characters embodies an ideology. Jenkins saw the character of Micah as a man who was always building barriers, whereas Jo thinks that race is a limiter. Accusing Jo of assimilation, Micah strives to reclaim his essential "blackness" as Jo contrastingly claims Micah has a "hang up" about his race and strives to overcome her own.Roger Ebert gave the film 3.5 out of 4 stars, calling the actors "effortlessly engaging" and the direction "assured"; he also noted the film was "beautifully photographed". Ebert is right on all counts. The acting is superb, very natural, and really shows off Wyatt Cenac as more than a comedian. The direction is strong, and the cinematography is gorgeous, some of the best you will find anywhere, whether in a big budget film or indie.The discussion of race is great. As a white man, maybe I can't see the issue from the point of view of Micah, Jo or Barry Jenkins. But I love that there's this divide of ideas. Micah is indignant, as he should be, about being a minority. But Jo prefers to look forward. Indeed, how does one define themselves? I don't think of myself as "white", and sometimes not even as a "man", but do these things define me whether or not I choose to accept them?

Unless he's willing to pursue a white woman (and he's totally not), he only has 5 out of every 100 women to choose from in the city. Then he finds a black woman he really desires, and he's torn up she's partnered with a white guy. As for her, although she really likes this bicycle man, and their hot & steamy sex they've had over a couple days, and she seems somewhat unhappy in her present relationship.. she ain't going to be switching lifestyles (remember too, she's unemployed), and moving from a nice, spacious, comfortable condo, into a tiny cramped box of an apartment, along with three bicycles and a fish-tank. So it does not appear she is going to be making any changes, and thus she rises early, and without goodbyes, peddles away as fast as she can. When the chemistry works between actors, and the dialog well written, these kinds of films are a joy to watch... a solid yes for viewing. And as an added bonus, there are several story-lines intertwined throughout the film.. all well done. This is engaging, intelligent, entertaining cinema.

And this is coming from someone who eagerly anticipated seeing this film. I was not impressed. In fact, I was bored stiff for most of the film.It started off with a lot of promise. I was engaged to the mystery of these two totally different characters, brought together by a one-night stand and reunited by curiosity--possibly loneliness. Despite her cattiness, I approved of the idea of him pursuing her and finding out who she really is. As I expected, she turns out to be a lonely yet worldly, intelligent, open minded woman who became smitten by the equally lonesome, pro-black charmer with radical ideologies. The dialogue was great and the cinematography was solid.Then, the film went left for me. It started with the preachy conversation they had at her place. It was appropriate but too convenient for the telling of this story. Then we move on to some uninteresting visuals inside a museum, some angled on passages I needed to be a speed reader just to take in before it was cut away, only to learn that I was being preached to even more. The whole 2nd ACT seemed to be stretched out in order to reach the necessary amount of minutes needed to be categorized as a legitimate feature. I mean, that party scene was longer than the both of "House Party" and "House Party 2," and what happened? Nothing. Just a long, drawn out uneventful party scene.To make things worse, the filmmaker threw in this moment featuring a community group discussing gentrification, a subject I'm deeply concerned about. However, it was touched on just enough to feel forced and not enough to hold any relevance for the story.Also, the acting seemed flat, mostly due to the male lead.In the end, I didn't know these characters at all. I wanted to care but I really didn't. I learned absolutely nothing. I even found myself reaching for a connection between gentrification and the love story. I may see how the main characters and their choices are being influenced by it, but that's me pushing it. The connection was unclear, leaving me with the only option of looking for something that might not be there. It wasn't a good film. 4/10.