They need to let men cry on screen, Noah Baumbach was so close

No really they do. In the wake of sexual harrasement allegations coming to light there is a big muddle of issues that many people, pyschologists, therapist and educators included, need to unravel.  Noah Baumbach's While We're Young that came out five years ago, to me reached the pinnacle of cinema when it shows Ben Stiller or Josh (in the film) who is brought to tears when his younger friend disappoints him at a big event that is paying tribute to Josh's father-in-law, who is another filmmaker. Its a tense moment, emotions are running high and no women are involved (that's a bone I will pick later in this post) in the drama, its just the men trying to talk things out. Its a moment of realization and Josh is hurt, really hurt that not only did his friend disappoint and use him but his wife won't take his side in the argument. All of this is hard for Josh, a struggling documentary filmmaker whose career is at a standstill. As Josh begins to tear up , his father-in-laws asks him "are you okay, son?"

"I'm not crying!", he responds sniffling. His eyes have widened, tears are waiting to burst out but he very slickly wipes his nose gets up and leaves. The camera lingers on his face for a bit, making it seem like Josh is going to let out some waterworks.

Nope, he just gets up and leaves. WHY? Why won't Hollywood, cinema for that matter show a man crying after an emotional tiff. A "masucline, macho, powerful" male who has good reason to be upset, the film used one hour and 45 minutes to establish that, just will not shed tears. Allowing men to express emotions (besides carnal desire and perversion) would have a dramatic impact on the way men are viewed. This in turn would have a domino effect and acknowledge the fact that men can be emotional too and offers them ways besides anger and abuse as coping mechanism for sorrow, frustation and disappointment.

Film plot

The film opens with Josh and Cornelia. a happily married couple in New York who have adapted to each other's rythm and like a well oiled machine fill each other's lives. Its refreshing to see a love story of a couple after the happily ever after and the dramatic wedding deal with new drama in their lives and no break up in the end (spoiler alert!). Noah Baumback really struck gold when he chose not one but three stable relationships for his film, all of which don't involve breaking up. There is temptation and of course an element of drama while steering clear of cliched misunderstandings and immaturity adopted from high school sitcoms. So props to capturing that aspect beautifully.

But that's the only thing the film has going for it. This struggling, slightly stuck up and unwilling to change cis-white man coming to terms with his aging body and the passage of time is the central theme of the film. I admit it is poetic for brief moments like when the old married couple Josh and Cornelia fall in love again with each after spending a considerable amount of time around a younger hipster couple- Jamie and Darby. They learn to appreciate each other and their accomplishments even more. Its bittersweet and confusing for a twenty something year to watch it because you feel stuck between the two young and free but also learning to mimic, project and behave like an older person. However this doesn't redeem the film for failing the Bechdel test and inserting the white man's saviour complex in there, subtly in the background.

Verdict

I thought it was a poignant film when Josh apologizes to Cornelia, as the movie starts to wind down, for not appreciating her presence in his life for all the years they spent married and proposes to her for the second time. This was rudely interupted and the feeling evaporated when Cornelia open a book in the airport to a picture of a colored baby and the director reveals that Josh and Cornelia are finally taking a holiday together, to Port-au Prince *severe eyerolling and loud noises of exasperation* The wistfullness in this scene and the brief eye contact between Josh and Cornelia suggest an adoption.

Why do they have to adopt a child of color? Why was that detail necessary in the film? Why did Baumbach not show them adopting a white baby? Or even a baby of color in New York? I'm sure there are plenty of American babies in the hospitals, prisons and troubled homes waiting to find a stable home for their babies. Just why.

Plot: A

Representation of Women: B (for I want to say trying)

Identity politics: C (its a bit old so I'm being generous) 

Casting: A+ 

Cinematography: B+ 

In short: Its definitely worth watching for trying to talk about a poignant issue but also to observe how close it came to breaking atleast one convention in Hollywood.