MovieChat Forums > Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (2015) Discussion > No as good as The Faults in Our Stars

No as good as The Faults in Our Stars


IMHO, I gave The Fault 8 stars and this one 7 star. I wasn't exactly sure about the relationship between me and Earl. They fighted and suddenly like nothing happened?! The titles are also very confusing!

reply

To me it's the opposite. Gave The Fault 6 (something irked me, forgot what) and this one 7. This one was a bit funny, a bit sad, a bit depressing and tried a bit too hard to look realistic in some moments. Good movie overall.

The owls are not what they seem.

reply

I think you are probably right. I should say I like Fault more and I gave it a high mark. Fault is simpler in a lot of ways - And it feels good. The this one is bit mixture - however I think it's bit overrated though.

reply

The slow clap maybe?

reply

Oh, man. I found TFiOS completely... disingenuous in its message (which irked me to no end).

I thought they netted as popular a female lead they could grab, one that would put butts in the seats, picked a tear-jerker of a topic-- cancer (although, it wasn't as sad as this, IMO) -- and put the marketing machine to work making them money ($124 million domestic, THREE HUNDRED worldwide).

This sold for 5 (mil), shot for 20 (mil), and netted only 6.25 by the end of six weeks at the box office (a 15 million dollar loss at the time). Such a pity, too, when it was just phenomenally better, and far less of a set-up, in my opinion.

I really think TFiOS ruined the audience for this one, and more's the pity!

reply

Oh, man. I found TFiOS completely... disingenuous in its message (which irked me to no end).

I thought they netted as popular a female lead they could grab, one that would put butts in the seats, picked a tear-jerker of a topic-- cancer (although, it wasn't as sad as this, IMO) -- and put the marketing machine to work making them money ($124 million domestic, THREE HUNDRED worldwide).

This sold for 5 (mil), shot for 20 (mil), and netted only 6.25 by the end of six weeks at the box office (a 15 million dollar loss at the time). Such a pity, too, when it was just phenomenally better, and far less of a set-up, in my opinion.

I really think TFiOS ruined the audience for this one, and more's the pity!


Yes. All of this.

Fortunately I had seen "Me, Earl..." first. It has such a fantastic style and voice to it, although I wonder if most of the film references were even caught by the youth oriented market for this movie. The evolution of Greg's feelings towards Rachel were plausible and the fact that he could only communicate with her in his preferred medium made sense.

But the "Fault Is In Our Stars"....yuck. What a treacly, manipulative mess. I hated Gus, he was the cancer-boy Gary Stu character. Nothing about the relationship between the kids felt genuine, although I give credit to Shailene Woodley for being a pretty good actress.

By the end of the movie I wanted to poke my eyes out.

reply

HAH! LOVE! LOVELOVE! =D -beam-

reply

Yeah!

TFiOS is too mellow.

M&E&TDG is heavier, deeper. Is not realistic all the time but it is plausible and raw in its own way.

For me is more like The perks of being a wallflower style. TFiOS is more like an obvious weep-chick-flick.

reply

I'll grant you all of that, yes! Even the wild swings at reality in some places. I totally see where you're coming from when you say it's more in the style of "The Perks of Being a Wallflower." =D

reply

I think "Spectacular Now" is the best of this genre.

I liked Perks and I liked Fault.

Among high school movies that are unfairly neglected would be "Terri" and "Rocket Science" from a few years ago.

I think Me and Earl ranks after all those. It gets the job done, surprisingly, but I don't think it's as special as some of the lovers of it would have us believe.

reply

I have seen the spectacular now and it was impressive but i found the ending to anti-climactic and the main character was actually a douchebag and not even that much of a likeable one. Fault in our stars was average and i feel like Perks was alright but lacked the heart. I feel like the music choices in each of these movies just represents them. The fault is filled with a lot of indie pop music showing the film to be very light hearted and not especially thought provoking. Perks used a stranger but older music showing how it'll be more existential and weirder than others as it its about the outcasts as such and different people.

I didn't catch that much decent music in the spectacular now, i'll have to rematch it and take a look. But you see me and earl has a very abstract music selection filled with mainly other film scores and Brian Eno songs. Brian enos music is can't be categorised, much like this film. Also his music feels very uplifting and emotional and leaves you very satisfied at the end much like the film.

All good films to be honest but i feel like the spectacular now is defiantly not the best teenage film. I feel like that honour would go to stand by me, and if that doesn't count probably this or boyhood or maybe even Rushmore. (if you haven't seen any of those films i highly recommend you do)

reply

Stand By Me definitely doesn't count but if it did it'd win by a landslide.

reply

To me, Fault was a totally commercial film that appeals to young adults. It was moving, yes. But it's pretty much straight-forward and sappy. Me and Earl was an artistically-made film through and through. From its writing to the way it was shot and scored.

reply

That's a fair comment! Fault has more fun to watch. The characters are more simple - not like Earl with whole lots of facets.

reply

I completely agree with you. The Fault in Our Stars is disgustingly overrated, but Me and Earl and the Dying Girl is criminally underrated. It's honest, sincere, doesn't try so hard like TFIOS did. This might just be my favourite movie of the year, and my second favourite movie about teenagers after Perks of Being a Wallflower.


That's the thing about life...nobody gets out alive.

reply

Agreed. BUt is Me and Earl and the Dying Girl underrated?
It has 8.0 on IMDb which it totally deserves.

I think you mean under-seen, as it only grossed something like 6 million on US.



Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down and a Wagging Finger of Shame

reply

Agreed! And totally underrated!

Yay! I'm so glad I'm not the only one who thought TFiOS was hugely over-rated.

reply

Fault was just one big set-up for me-- pick a popular star, put them in a tear-jerker (ohhh, cancer!), and set the marketing machine in motion. Like I said earlier in the thread TFiOS has made $124 million domestic, THREE HUNDRED worldwide.

This sold for 5, shot for 20 (mil), and netted 6.25 by the end of six weeks at the box office. Such a pity, too, when it was just phenomenally better (like you said, it had artistic integrity), and was far less a set-up on movie-going audiences.

I really think TFiOS ruined the audience for this one! And that sucks!

reply

Agree with this. I liked Fault but found this to be more thoughtful.

reply

Hi JoanCallas,

Except for the cancer element and being adapted from Young Adult novels, there were many things that caused The Fault In Our Stars to be bigger at the box office. The Fault in Our Stars was a far more popular novel written by one of the biggest Young Adult novelist, John Green. At it's heart TFIOS was a romance and had a female protagonist which added to appeal for fans of the novel. had two better known leads, and was also shot more conventionally. It also had a romantic vibe rather than that of an indie art film.

I liked both films and certainly wouldn't blame the lack of box office of one on the success of another. Remember, Paper Towns, another John Green adaptation also didn't find much of an audience either.

reply

I liked this one better. Something in the Faults annoyed me. I just stopped watching it after ten minutes. This one kept me captivated with its sense of humor.
On the other hand, maybe it helped that this one isn't so mainstream, so I expected less.

reply

I agree 100%. Also I read the book because I wanted to know what all the fuss was about and was thoroughly unimpressed and annoyed. The characters themselves irritated me and came off as pretentious and unrealistic (their personalities, nothing to do with them being sick). It just felt so cliche and *eyeroll-ish* to me. I just can't stand the way Green writes so it didn't really translate well to film for me, lol. Definitely thought this one had much smarter humor and was generally just more artistic and nicer to look at. It had a lot more creative details and I really loved the eccentric and completely different personalities of all the intersecting characters.

reply

The Faults in Our Stars was so bad in my opinion as for this one it was piece of an art .

reply

Can't agree more. The Faults in Our Stars was so overrated. I did not like their actings too. This one Me and Earl and the Dying Girl was so pleasent and artistic

reply

Fault 6/10 the book was better obviously
Me and earl and the dying girl 9/10 GREAT

reply

The Fault in our stars annoyed me


This movie moved me



At first I was a bit skeptical, it felt too much like a Wes Anderson clone... then.... it found its voice and by the end of it I was touched in a way that felt genuine and honest, instead of stylized and emotionless like most Anderson films.

reply

TFIOS is a manipulative, melodramatic piece of crap.

reply