Mona Lisa Smile (2003)

"Mona Lisa Smile" is a sort of a "Dead Poets Society" with (and for) women. Yet, Mona Lisa is to Poets what Julia Roberts is to Robin Williams, or the acting talents of Robert Sean Leonard or Ethan Hawk are to the likes of Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles or Maggie Gyllenhaal. Not that they are bad, they aren't (Gyllenhall is exceptionally good, for example, as she proved in 'Crazy Heart' or 'Dark Knight'). Yet their face value is greater than their actual depth. Robin Williams is a comedian, but when he needs intensity, he gives it, as he shown in 'Good Will Hunting', 'Bicentennial Man' or Poets. On the other hand, Julia Roberts always gives similar performances, but she smiles a lot, and her smile is captivating. The same happens with "Mona Lisa Smile". Everything looks good, but underneath there is little to see, understand or go about. The action is set in the 50s, in a prestigious private school for woman. Although they are the greatest young minds in the country, they are groomed for etiquette and marriage. And once they marry, they are destined to be housewives. Julia Roberts, an art teacher, arrives to fill a teaching position for the new year. She is broadminded and ready to go against the establishment, trying to instill a sense of individuality and "your life is yours, live it" in the young girls. She will, off course, face the opposition of everyone, from some of the girls (specially Kirten Dunst), to the head master, to the small elite society of the town. And basically that's it. With the exception of the suicide, everything is the same as in Dead Poets, right to the end. But when in Poets we could see believable characters, in Mona Lisa everything is stereotyped. Poets was a movie which could exist beyond the context it portrayed, because the characters were incredibly powerful, a great force that drove the picture. In Mona Lisa, it is the portrayal of that 50s context that's important, and so the characters are sent to the background. They are there just to show said context, so they are superficial and their actions are screenplay actions, not human ones. The movie focuses in 3 or 4 girls in the class, those with a closer bond to Roberts. One has affairs with older teachers, one is trapped in a loveless marriage at 18, one has no prospects of a husband which leaves her a sort of an outcast, all are victims of etiquette and parental control, etc, etc. Each one represents a specific problem of the era, and the scenes they are in exist to give examples of the restrictions and conventions of the time. There is everything here except one girl that needs an abortion. I felt cheated! Honestly, that's the one thing that was missing! What is the point of Mona Lisa? To give a condensed history lesson? If that's it then it's a sort of a success. But as a drama it leaves something to be desired. This does not have a meaning that could have a parallel in present society, nor is the drama of the several characters interesting enough. The acting is good (check out Marcia Gay Harden), set design as well, plunging you right into the decade. Yet, showing only the dated conventions scene after scene, the movie becomes a dated convention as well. Director Mike Newell keeps with his good-directing-not-that-good-a-script, tradition. Even "The Emperor's Club" (2002), a sort of Dead Poets, part II, is better than this.