Customer Reviews

Pumpkin [VHS]

5 star:		(39)
4 star:		(25)
3 star:		(18)
2 star:		(10)
1 star:		(29)

 

 

If you'll notice, this movie gets incredibly mixed reviews with some people hailing it as "Brilliant!" while others call it exploitive or horribly uneven. I have a theory that can reconcile these two interpretations.

(Spoilers ahead) My interpretation is simple: Carolyn succeeds at suicide. The rest of the movie, after the suicide attempt, is simply her imagined happy ending as she slips into the beyond.

This perspective explains many of the problems others have with the movie. A common complaint is that the ending does not match the beginning. But, if the ending is Carolyn's fantasy, it doesn't have to. Until the suicide episode, the movie plays out as a dark comedy. Brenda Blethyn chasing Christina Ricci while shouting "you raped my son!" is as funny as anything Heathers offers. After the suicide episode, Pumpkin becomes a farce. The fight and Ken's redemption after his car accident is incredibly funny as farce. Ken becomes Pumpkin's coach in no time at all! Given a realistic timeline, this could never have happened. But, as a dream of Carolyn's, this makes perfect sense. The farce is picking on the cliched plot devices of melodramatic made-for-TV movies.

I enjoyed both the beginning and ending of this movie, but only if I view it from this angle. Then, it actually becomes a consistent movie. It is a dark comedy throughout. Is there anything more darkly comedic than Carolyn's farcical death dream?

Like Adaptation, the movie does not confine itself to a single reality. So, it can be confusing for audience members who are used to the one-reality convention. If there is a flaw to Pumpkin, it is that the filmmakers are a bit too subtle about the transition. I didn't arrive at this interpretation until the day after I saw the movie for the first time.

First off, a minor correction for the offical review of this film. These two may be first time co-directors, but this wasn't their first film. They're the writing team behind "Dead Man on Campus".

And no, a lot of people aren't going to like this movie. If you liked "But I'm a Cheerleader", you'll probably love it. I did. The characters are drawn in much the same way: earnest, but completely lunatic.

The subject matter is also, like 're-orienting' queerfolk, generally considered not appropriate comedy material, and as such, there are some folks who will hate this movie no matter how the subject is approached, because there "just isn't anything funny about the mentally disabled". I thought it did a good job of staying between the sort of flat-out mean fun that "Something About Mary" made of disabled kids, and the smarmy "our poor wounded angels" attitude so many people adopt when portraying the mentally disabled. This movie treats their subjects like normal people - some of them are mean, some of them are nice, some of them are better than others.

I've never seen anything like "Pumpkin," and I doubt I ever will. It is a movie so multi-layered and so sophisticated in its apparent and deceiving simplicity that it's likely to go over the head of moviegoers used to the same old simplistic commercial fodder.

I can tell you three things about this film: 1. The closer you look and analyse it, the funnier and more meaningful it becomes 2. It's impossible to pidgeonhole or put in a box and that's all critics do these days and so it is probably one of the most underrated films in a long time 3. Appreciation and a following for this film will grow through the years as people see it as a daring and provocative piece of art and not a missfired attempt at satire.

I've seen Pumpkin three times and I'm betting that this film will become a classic and will reappear at your local retro theater in years to come.

If some of you haven't noticed, this movie isn't meant to be hardcore reality. Its supposed to be a story, and thats what the directors wanted. Not a detailed look into the life of a surroity, not a perfect student, just a normal girl who falls in love but doesnt want to really. I thought this was a really good movie. It's supposed to show almost a sense of surreality. I never would have thought everyone whould have such negatory reviews toward it. Perhaps all these people are just like the people in the movie. Afraid of something diffrent.

Despite the obvious lack of character development, which it hardly needed, this movie was very touching, and at times funny, but not from the "American Pie" point of view that it seemed to be billed as in the previews. In truth the movie was not at all what it seemed, a shallow attempt at risky comedy, in fact I found it quite profound, and at times a bit deep. One of the points that reviewers have stated is that the movie needed more character development, and to that I ask where? With the exception of Pumpkin and at times Carolyn, all the characters where shallow, ignorant, and very stereotypical Southern California rich yuppies who care more about appearances and judge people by them rather than what is inside. And, in reality, that is all the story is about. Pumpkin, who is slightly mentally challenged, is really more introverted than retarded, this from years of repression from his shallow mother. Enter Carolyn, who despite being extremely intelligent, finds herself fitting in with the shallow crowd, being popular, vice being herself, but this separates her from the rest of the characters who, though popular, really have no moral standing and are too quick to judge the new romance between Carolyn and Pumpkin. In the end, though, we find that she has been the inspiration to all of the characters and amazingly, and painfully, they all learn a little something from her and finally begin to see though the shallowness of their past.
On a stranger note, there was one particular quirk in the movie I must address, because, from a humor stand point it is pretty funny, but from a drama/realistic stand point, not so much. After Carolyn's ex is humiliated by Pumpkin at the dance, he, the ex, runs off to his car. His car appears to be a charger or some other car of a similar make. He swerves, and next thing you see is supposed to be his car flying off the cliff, however it's a limo now, which after a few seconds bursts into flames and crashes on the rocks below. The next day he is in the hospital, not a scratch, bruise or burn on his body. So, was this a metaphor? a dream? a bit of "Hollywood" joking? or jus bad film making? I also found a bit of interest in the look of the film, how the characters all looked to be from the late 50's or 60's and a line that Carolyn says at the dance "Pumpkin's not riding on the back of the bus any more", seems to point that the movie may have originally been written as a interracial work, but as that is not the hot topic it once was, it was rewritten to be a bit racier by today's standards. But maybe it's just me.

This film is so subversive, I love it! We've finally reached the point in our society where the love that dare not speak its name is that between a hot babe and a [ ]!
The reason why I mention these two Directors in my title is because this film is lush with color and beautiful music, I specially liked the Belle & Sebastion tune, and is quite purposely melodramatic to an absurd degree(remember the car crash sequence that Roger Ebert hated so much?).
If you watch carefully Pumpkin and Caroline actually spend very little time together. Caroline is obviously projecting onto Pumpkin her desires because he is a blank slate to her. The revealing scene is at the end of the film when she asks him if he was speaking literally or metaphorically about something and he answers "what?".
Cliche's abound in this film, the overprotective mother, the jock who becomes a better man after losing the use of his legs, the "blond" sorority, the fight at the dance(is that music from Rebel Without A Cause?). The symbolism is so in your face, the rats, the rotting fruit covered with flies, the dead bird. Christina Ricci was very wise to get this future cult film under her belt before moving on to adult fare.
The only reason I can't give this film 5 stars is because ultimately it has no message. Love conquers all is a childish concept and I can't believe that women will be flocking to the special olympics looking for dates after seeing this film. Just enjoy the film for what it is; a tasty piece of ear and eye candy.

If you look for movies that are reflective of real life, maybe you won't like this. Or if you harbor intense guilt/dislike/shame towards handicapped people. But if you watch movies because you like to stretch reality, stretch your mind, and use your imagination, then I would recommend Pumpkin. I bought it after seeing it only one time, but I thought the characters were a great study on relationships, stereotypes, and social norms. No, it is not always realistic- hence it is a movie. The characters and their reactions to their environment are all exaggerated. My only issue is that I felt it could use a little more editing. It stretched out a little too long- I kept thinking it was going to end but didn't. So if you are feeling open and enjoyed movies like Ghost World, or anything with a slightly darker humor, give it a chance. You'll probably like it.

After reading incredibly mixed reviews where critics badmouthed this film because they couldn't pidgeonhole it, I knew Pumpkin had to have something going for it. Quirky? Yes. (Pumpkin finds an Englebert Humperdink album mixed in with his late father's girlie-mag stash). Funny? Yes, sometimes in subtle ways that you have to watch for. (Christina Ricci attempts suicide after making a mess of her sorority status by--drinking Pepto Bismol and contact lens solution).
There's lots of little visual "signals" like that throughout the film (was that a LIVE baby shrimp in her salad?) and I arrive at the conclusion that the directors certainly intend to play with your head a bit. Play they do, taking on several sub-genres of comedy at once. If you like anything by John Waters or even Steve Martin, you'll like this film. Check your preconceived notions of what a film "should" be at the door.

I agree with Jeff Shannon.

Pumpkin could have scored higher for me because the concept has never been done before. It's unfortunate that the script was not well written. No matter how great the actor, a bad script is hard to execute. Christina Ricci is an able actor, but she has great difficulty pulling off sincerity. Her transformation from spoiled sorority girl to sensitive human isn't believable. The script skims the surface of each character, without really developing who they are and why they act as they do. It goes from one unbelievable scene to the next, and although I stuck with it to the end...hoping that something would change...my initial instinct in the first 10 minutes to "stop watching" should have been followed. It's a real disappointment to me when such a challenging film topic isn't done well. I'm also surprised that Francis Ford Coppola (who funded the movie) didn't help the two young filmmakers out a little more. With some guidance from him, this would have been a great film.

By all means borrow the movie (or rent it), but if something tells you to stop it early on, don't perservere. Turn off the DVD and doing something else. Unless you are a screenwriter...then by all means watch it, and then go develop a script that does justice to this challenging topic.

Carolyn McDuffy (Christina Ricci) is a girl who assists her sorority by helping a bunch of mentally challenged adults for the "Challenged Games". Carolyn's training partner is Pumpkin Romanoff. The sheltered and superficial Carolyn is not used to situations like this and she often violates social norms and offends people without even realizing why certain actions and comments would be offensive. Unlike her sorority sisters, Carolyn has a good heart but she is still ignorant enough that she doesn't automatically earn any respect from the film's audience. She is a unique character that conveniently slips under our radar as such. At first apprehensive about dealing with Pumpkin, Carolyn soon comes to the realization that Pumpkin is at least genuine, which is completely unlike anyone else in her world, especially the girls in her sorority. Carolyn falls deeply in love with Pumpkin. This has a dramatic effect on the lives of both Carolyn and Pumpkin and that is essentially what this film focuses on.

Christina Ricci is almost always great in anything she has ever done. She takes on unique roles for the most part and only surfaces up to the mainstream in flashes these days. Pumpkin is not a mainstream film as it was hardly even released in the United States. Unfortunately it is roles like this that can showcase just how talented Ricci really is. Making characters we are not supposed to like enjoyable and entertaining is when she is at her best. Hank Harris plays Pumpkin and does a great job at a kind of role that is easy to compliment in most films, but he somehow manages to make Pumpkin fit appropriately even in this unusual environment. Brenda Blethyn plays Pumpkin's mother and is outstanding as always.

Pumpkin's overtones are primarily pretty serious ones in the way of a Romeo and Juliet kind of story. So why is this comedy? Why should we be laughing? Answering that honestly may extort some guilt but don't worry, you're not alone. That does not however make Pumpkin any less bold in its basic storyline and it is probably even bolder in its very existence as a comedy. Few films are as dry and demented as this. I couldn't help but think of Todd Solondz's Storytelling and Happiness while I watched Pumpkin. It seemed to contain the same provoking elements and bizarre dark humor. I never thought that was possible again after seeing Happiness but here it is. Perhaps Solondz is an influence. Much like Carolyn McDuffy's character, the movie Pumpkin's ignorance may anger you even if it is innocent, but the film's heart is for the most part in the right place in its own twisted way.