I had to give this film 1 star, I wanted to give it -10

The contempt that they shared is worth the same amount of energy that you put into your diatribe as a fan of the film. It's a message bored to throw their two cents into, not an exclusive club for the elite who either understand or don't understand the film. Get a life, yourself, before you judge the energy of another. Or just turn it off and walk away, as the OP did by walking out of the theater. Somethings are not made for everyone.

-I'm going to remake Transformers 3. No CGI! In 4-D! Smell-o-vision!-

I agree with you - why would anyone take the time to proclaim their disdain of this film to anonymous internet users? I have NEVER taken the time to create an account and post an opinion about a film (or anything else) - pro or con. However, I did take the time in this case to let others know that to me, this is the MOST HORRIBLE movie, EVER and that if one loves animals, one should NOT watch this movie. It is not a feel-good, happy or funny movie. I did not like the characters, the story or the depressing overall tone of this movie. Why did I continue to watch it? Because being the sucker I am, I somehow thought that the couple would go pick up the cat and somehow their common love of the cat would magically make them realize how much they love one another. I am truly a stupid schmuck for thinking this but it is the happy Christmas season ..... . To me, this movie was depressing and disturbing AT BEST. I watched it because I like "Richie" in the New Adventures of Old Christine.

IMDB's description as a "Comedy" is absolutely misleading.

I have learned my lesson - don't waste a minute watching a movie without first consulting IMDB!

wizardo11
Well said! I am surprised at the vituperativeness of the negative reaction to this film, whose characters would undoubtedly be surprised to find they could evoke such hate. It makes me think that, on the contrary, the flick rings some uncomfortable bells in the minds or memories of the nay-sayers.
I for one found the characters very believable and could cite a number of examples among acquaintances from my own past - and present. The word is dysfunctional or malaise - is that a crime? The pacing was likewise perfect. I feel sorry for people who think it was too slow - is ADHD that pervasive in the States?
I likewise loved the conversation with the moon. If flights like this are too much for you, I wonder why you are watching movies in the first place, for their magic lies in such wonder-working.
Not as good as "You and Me...", but nevertheless a thought-provoking and enigmatic work with a very tight script and plot development.

A lot of very accurate comments, and some interesting questions in that response. I enjoyed 'The Future', but could imagine how badly the whole thing could've been if mishandled. The 'pretentious hipster' label seems out of place, I find only authenticity and sincerity at the heart of the film. Echoes of "Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" which also dealt with relationships falling apart. Your description 'quiet and heartbreaking' nails it - anyone familiar with the moment of break-up will recognise Jason's attempts to delay, then break free from that devastation. While magic realism can go horribly wrong, here it helps reveal the truth of what's really happening. Strange that so many conventional romcoms seem disconnected from human experience, but in this beautiful little film there's genuine insight and a delicacy of touch which makes it so moving.

Thank you for your thoughtful defense of this film.

I think the reason people disliked it so much is that the cat died. That made me extremely disheartened too. But remember that the couple was prepared to adopt it, it was just that the shelter insisted on keeping it 30 days to heal. I'd have to re-watch the film to be sure of all I'm saying, but in my view it was that proviso -- that little time warp -- that launched them on their journey of self-discovery. Because they wanted to be forever pet parents, they wanted to be sure their relationship was forever, too. To me that bespeaks the best of pet parents.

I loved the nuttiness of the couple. They just didn't make sense to ordinary mortals but they were possibly the only two people in the world who could understand each other. I am sad to read someone's opinion here that the character Jason had decided to move on. I thought by Sophie's returning and his letting her stay "one night" that that one night would go on and on and on. Remember, he was taken by his friend's artwork and collections that mirrored his/Sophie's and told Sophie what he had learned, that one or both would do terrible things before their relationship became permanent. So I was hoping one cat life would be worth the many lives of the relationship.

Cruelty to animals does seem to be a theme in Miranda July's work -- see her first feature, "Me and You and Everyone We Know." Of course, the animal there is a fish, but perhaps she is saying animals are often victims of cruel fate -- and we are, too. Maybe she's a closet murderer -- cruelty to animals is supposed to be a signal in the childhoods of people who turn into murderers. If so, she certainly turned her neurosis into something constructive, art- and film-making. If you read July's biography, you find she came from two probably very artsy, different intellectuals and grew up largely in Berkeley, so of course she's a little nutty! I really loved the way Jason and Sophie took their potential pet-parenting so seriously that, again, they wanted to make sure everything was secure in the home that was supposed to have become Paw-Paw's nest.

A few points about the reality of Paw-Paw's situation: a), the shelter might not have attempted to fix Paw-Paw in the first place, as he was feral; twice I took wild animals to vets who euthanized them. One was a turtle, the other was a raccoon. There very likely was nothing the vets could have done for them, but in reality a shelter might have found a reason not to help the wild Paw-Paw; b) in reality, Paw-Paw might not have cared a soux for his relationship with Sophie and Jason, wanting nothing to do with them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but feral cats that have been out in the wild for very long do not domesticate. Of course, Paw-Paw's having been down so long and nursed back to health might have helped him adjust. But that brings up point c), which is what really bothered me -- why, if the shelter went to all that trouble to cure him, would it have then been so swift to kill him? Waiting one day does not seem to have been a huge imposition. And couldn't they get a hold of Sophie or Jason? I suppose this is another quirk of fate that added to the tragedy: for some reason, Sophie turned off their internet; and neither had a cell phone? Or a phone? Perhaps the responsibility for Paw-Paw's death really does lie with them, but I was angry at the shelter. I'm not sure if in a real life a shelter that had put so much energy into saving a cat would have let it go that quickly; if Paw-Paw really was adoptable, the shelter might have put him up for adoption. And, finally, d), if all Paw-Paw was doing was staying off his foot, I think he could have done that at home with Sophie and Jason, who would have given him their own brand of strange but sublime nurturing.

Finally, my reaction to the overall plot: I was a little surprised by Sophie's getting together with the middle-aged creepy man but not surprised that she took a detour even if it was through suburban normalcy. Perhaps that meant she and Jason would end up with some semblance of normalcy which July might have dearly missed in her own childhood and which would further cement Sophie and Jason's permanence. Or perhaps it meant Sophie would never go back to that; or that suburban normalcy isn't always all that normal, given the daughter's night outside. At any rate, today, couples having glitches in which one or both cheat on each other but discover they were meant to be together and don't get overly worked up about it seems to be the trend: see Butter and Extract, to name two movies with such themes. I am relieved that many movies no longer have the obligatory "get out!" scene; such extreme reactions then require really lucky events to bring a couple back together and there is passionate making up, which really only sets people up for another violent cycle. The newer indie way of looking at love makes more sense.