If you’re at least in your mid-30s, you probably remember the tabloid saga of Mary Kay LeTourneau, a sixth-grade teacher who committed statutory rape by sleeping with one of her students, 12-year-old Vili Fualaau. She served about six years in prison, but had two children by Fualaau and they eventually married, staying together for fourteen years until they separated, shortly after which she died of cancer. It was played for laughs, but it was a very real tragedy, with Fualaau a victim of her grooming and abuse, while she herself had a history of private tragedies from alleged abuse in her first marriage to having her three-year-old brother drown in a pool while she was playing in it at the other end.
The new film May December, streaming exclusively on Netflix,takes this story and very, very thinly veils it with some new names and modest details, envisioning the couple as still married twenty-plus years later with one kid in college and two more about to graduate from high school. Within this movie, there’s a film in production about their story at the time of the actual abuse, and an actress, Elizabeth (Natalie Portman), arrives at the family’s house to spend time with them as she prepares for her role as the younger Gracie (Julianne Moore). Elizabeth at least thinks of herself as an extremely serious actress and embeds herself in the family’s daily routines, following Gracie to things like a flower arranging class and helping her with her home baking business, but also clearly flirting with Gracie’s husband, Joe (Charles Melton), who is now just about the same age as Elizabeth. She also meets Gracie’s ex-husband and one of her children from that marriage as well as some neighbors who offer their own interpretations of events that may be unreliable but at least tend to upset the standard narrative about the couple, both the original crimes and their marriage today.
The tone and atmosphere of May December seem like those of a serious drama, but the script is far more that of a dark comedy. Elizabeth and Gracie are utterly ridiculous people, ridiculous in different ways but similar enough that they clash many times throughout their partnership here. Elizabeth’s preparation for the role borders on parody, such as when she visits the pet store where Gracie and Joe worked when she groomed him – and asks to see the stockroom where they first had sex (or, where Gracie first raped Joe). She seems reasonable at first, just affected, but as the film goes on she comes across as either unhinged or perhaps just not that smart, as if she’s going through the steps she believes a good actor takes but doesn’t understand how to translate the checklist into practice.
Gracie, meanwhile, appears to be arrested development in senior citizen form, crying and throwing tantrums like a small child, with a slight lisp or impediment that comes and goes depending on what impression she’s trying to make. She has, or at least has had, the power in her relationship, but as they get older and the kids that bound them together are about to leave them with an empty nest, she might see the odds of Joe leaving her as higher than ever – and perhaps she sees this new film as a way to prevent Joe from leaving their history behind him.
It all leaves Joe, oddly enough, as the film’s most nuanced and interesting character, giving Melton, previously best known for the C.W. drama Riverdale, a great chance to prove himself as a serious actor. Joe insists that he wasn’t a victim, and that the way the world sees him isn’t at all how he sees himself. He’s not happy in the marriage, or at least not happy enough, but it’s less overt than it might be – he hasn’t woken up one day to realize he was groomed, or suddenly decided he doesn’t want to be married to an old lady when he’s still in his 30s. He’s also perplexed by Elizabeth, who comes from another world that he never got to experience, which leaves him vulnerable to her charms.
Joe also raises monarch caterpillars as a hobby, and Haynes is not the least bit shy about beating the viewer over the head with the metaphor here. I’m all for metaphor and symqbolism in films, but the script here lays it on so thick that you have no room for thought or interpretation, and it ends up a distraction from the tripartite character study that’s at the heart of the film. The script’s ambiguous conclusion forces Elizabeth to rethink much of what she believes she saw and learned while visiting Gracie and Joe, and opens the whole film up to more interpretations, enough so that the caterpillar stuff just wasn’t necessary.
All three leads are excellent, unsurprising for the two who’ve already won Oscars themselves, although the current odds seem to show Moore and Melton on the bubbles for the two supporting categories. It’s possible that May December will only get a nod for original screenplay, which might be merited as it’s looking like the 2023 movie crop ended up a very strong one, but this feels like a film that should earn more acclaim for its actors, without all three of whom it just can’t work. After Haynes’ distracting Velvet Underground documentary, which was sunk by the split-screen gimmick and didn’t give enough story about the band’s incredible influence, it’s good to see him return with a film this complex and challenging.
There’s been much debate about whether it’s a drama or comedy — I come down on the drama side, with the caveat that there are a few moments (including, but not limited to, the hot dog conundrum) that hint at what a campier version might have looked like (and that Haynes would have been entirely capable of making).
I agree. I didn’t see it as a comedy either. I was surprised it was nominated as a comedy at the GG and am surprised when other people see it as one.
I would say that Portman’s character and performance are the most defining comedic feature (e.g., her scene in the stock room is absolutely comic, if cringeworthy). I think the film’s ability to create this debate is one of its best facets. It’s got a lot of both.
This is bizarre. I distinctly remember this when the scandalous news broke. Sort of. I thought it had occurred while I was in high school (It didn’t), and I thought it had occurred in my hometown (It didn’t).
I would like to watch this film. At the risk of asking a stupid question, would this be a bad choice to watch with a family member who is an survivor of an assault, and who had a family member that suffered a similar trauma?
I feel stupid even asking this question. I’ll just watch the movie by myself.