You're 23


Seriously, 23?! If you're having these problems now, you have a loooooong way to go with each other. This movie would have been better served if the characters were older. Nothing is at stake when breaking up means just going out and finding 20000000 more appropriate suitors at any bar, club, yoga studio, or class in Manhattan.

The performances were good and the movie captured New York well, but other than that...who cares if a few fetuses get tired of each other at age 23? Break up. Find someone new. Call us again when it actually matters.

reply

You're an idiot, It makes perfect sense because at that age even though you're in "love" you still haven't developed all the way, so what says you will stay in "love"

if they were older they should have had less reason to see other people and all that other crap.

reply

[deleted]

Plausibility wasn't the main contention the OP had with the film's characters' ages. Their comment is perhaps somewhat revealing of the age demographic they fall into, odds are they're weren't younger than 25 when they posted. The point which was intended is that it's hard to be emotionally invested at the level of depth this movie conveys with these characters due to their supposed young age.

So yea, the gripe with the film wasn't really dealing with believability but rather the purpose of even making a film that deals with young love in such a way that the loss is meant to feel significant when for the OP, 23 is roughly when our current society has dictated many and perhaps even most people should have reached their prime in terms of relationship experimentation and self discovery through trial and error of rapid succession courtships.

This thread was never meant to debate the validity of such a young couple's inevitable demise. The question is why should we give an ever-loving crap when breakups are a sneeze in the park at such an opportune age? In other stories', the audience senses a loss because the heartbreak isn't just because they're going to miss that person, they're going to miss the life that was planned with that person and that's what a breakup entails when it happens between a slightly older couple. Which is why rom-coms always feature a late 20 to 30 something who has missed their chance at love. We move from a stage of having a buffet and sampling all that we can fit on our plate to having limited options. This movie went and put puppy love on a pedestal and then tried to equate it to a mature love that was meant to last but somehow tragically didn't. It's a terrible premise because the actual tragedy would be if it did last. See relationships are supposed to end at 23. It's rough but it doesn't nearly take the wind out of a person's sails like losing someone when the shallow dating pool has dwindled to dysfunctional rejects and you still can't let go of what your early 20's had taught you to want and consider "the one". It's a reset button on life and the best movies show the protagonist going through a wide range of coping mechanisms and experiences such as misery, loneliness, reinvention, renewal, finding new meaning in life, and either they never move on, or they get beyond their disappointment, loss, and despair, or they let it get the better of them.

reply

lol. that was great ^

reply

Yeah, when I found out they were 23 it made it seem like the relationship wasn't worth saving anyways. 23 is too young to settle down (in my opinion, most of the time). That means that they started dating at 19. I thought they were 26-28 which really had me rooting for them but they still have a long way to go. They were each other's first love and those are more like lessons than long-lasting. So I'm just going to go on pretending that they were 26-28, it makes me like the movie a lot more :)
That's my only complaint though. I really enjoyed the film, the story, the actors, the characters, the cinematography and the music.

reply

[deleted]

I agree. "You're 23!!!!" was used like a total putdown in this film. Yeah, 23, life is over, mom.

_____
"Do I look to be in a gaming mood?"

reply