Lymelife (2008)

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Derick Martini's Lymelife is a funny and profoundly moving portrait of the American family. The film examines the highs and lows of those trying to fulfil the American dream - from the thrill of success to the devastating feeling of personal failure.Set in Long Island in the 1970s, the film exposes the dark side of what looks like a suburban paradise, tracking the ups and downs of two dysfunctional families living through this tumultuous decade. The story revolves around the shy, awkward, 15-year-old Scott (Rory Culkin), whose family is enclosed in a world of pessimism and regret whilst an outbreak of Lyme disease threatens their community.Scott's father Mickey (Alec Baldwin) is a workaholic determined to be, as he puts it, a 'chaser', not a loser. Mickey's wife Brenda (Jill Hennessy) is forced to endure the burden of his desperate need for success – pushing the couple to the edge of divorce. In the midst of all this turmoil, Scott develops a crush on his next-door neighbour, Adrianna (Emma Roberts). She seems to be the only person in the world who is sympathetic to Scott's sensitivity as she also comes from a troubled family. Her depressed mother Melissa (Cynthia Nixon) is caught up in a clandestine love affair and her father Charlie (Timothy Hutton) is slowly losing his battle against Lyme disease.True, Lymelife brings to mind several other coming-of-age indie flicks and the central story – geeky boy from weird family in American suburb falls in love with the girl next door – is not very original. Still, Lymelife is far from a run-of-the-mill Sundance contender. The exceptional performances by the blue-chip cast, combined with a gritty narrative, raises it above the level of the average independent movie.Take the scene where Mickey and Brenda are arguing over how to punish Scott for brutally beating up a school mate (a real bully who, frankly, deserved the thrashing). Here, a typical parental conflict escalates into a whirlwind of vulgar language, animated body language and frustrated facial expressions, making it a deeply moving scene. It's a very realistic moment and the audience is compelled to consider how these kinds of domestic scenes affect innocent children. In Lymelife, Scott and Adrianna are suffering from their parents' shattering marriages, whilst trying to adjust to the frightening world of adulthood.The dark side of the film is made bearable by Martini's use of double entendres and wit, smoothing over some of the choking intensity. This is executed through the endless disputes and futile quarrels between Scott's parents, reducing them to childlike behaviour and leading to roaring moments of laughter both on and off the screen. However, this also sometimes detracts from the seriousness of the film and the message it tries to convey.Overall, Martini has drawn from a deep well of the kinds of meaningful people, circumstances and events that we are all bound to encounter at some point of our lives. Martini has admitted that the film is 'more than a semi-autobiography', featuring events that occurred in his childhood, including a family friend contracting Lyme disease.In the film, the aggressive outbreak of Lyme disease spreads anxiousness and paranoia - as it did in real life in 1970s America. After contracting the disease, Charlie slowly drifts away from reality into an unknown and lonely world, triggering obsessive behaviour. This is painful to watch as we witness a man stripped of his pride and exposed to all kinds of humiliations. Hutton captures well the nervous movements and erratic behaviour of a person afflicted by the illness; his performance is compelling and at the same time distressing.In Lymelife, the outbreak of Lyme disease is also an extended metaphor. Just like epidemics will have corrosive effects if an illness goes untreated, Martini seems to be saying, so rifts will emerge in relationships if the people involved do not confront their problems. In the film, the effects are evident: failed marriages, deep distrust, emotional damage.Lyme disease is transmitted by a bite from a blood-sucking parasite which normally lives on deer. In a scene in the film, a herd of deer is galloping freely in the woods. They are meant to symbolise the desire of Matt and Adrianna – and countless other children – to run away from their intolerable lives. But then, the woods become more dense, confining the movement of the deer – just like Matt and Adrianna are blocked by the obstacles set up by the circumstances of their families and community.Lymelife shows the effect that individuals' pursuit of success and happiness can have on the people around them. Here, it is Mickey's family that pays the price for his desperate attempts at chasing the American Dream. Behind the idyllic white picket fences of American suburbia lurks a not so black-and-white world that Martini exposes in an engaging and moving way.

"The one thing that the public dislikes, is afraid of, is novelty. Any attempt to extend the subject-matter of art is extremely distasteful to the public; and yet the vitality and progress of art depend in a large measure on the continual extension of subject-matter." - Oscar WildeDirected by Derick Martini, "Lymelife" watches as several middle-class, suburban Americans wrestle with adultery, unhappiness and boredom. The film was loosely based on the childhood experiences of its director.Many films have attempted to map the disaffections of white suburbia. Virtually all these films focus on sex as being the primary source of discontentment. "Lymelife" is no different, the film observing as fathers cheat on wives, mothers regret marriages and young lovers fret over first kisses. Then the guns are brought out and people "shockingly" die. This is a genre that can't make it to 90 minutes without killing someone.Independent cinema has long been as formulaic as mainstream Hollywood. For most of its running time, "Lymelife" is itself just like every other "disaffected white suburbanites" movie ("American Beauty", "The Ice Storm", "The Sweet Hereafter", "Life as a House", "Snow Angels", "Little Children", "Revolutionary Road", "Imaginary Heroes", "House of Sand and Fog", "The Squid and the Whale" etc). At its best, though, "Lymelife" does sketch a decent portrait of a marriage in collapse. Elsewhere the film is buoyed by several fine performances (Rory Culkin, Kieran Culkin, Timothy Hutton etc). Emma Roberts co-stars as a not quite Manic Pixie Dream Girl.7/10 – See "Safe", "Pump up the Volume", "Everything Must Go" and "Happiness".

I can honestly say, that this is a fantastic film, with some excellent performances by the main cast, in particular the Culkins, Baldwin,Hutton and Nixon. The story is a simple but beautifully written tale of love, divorce, war and hope in America at time of political and economic change. Admittedly, this was never going to be a box office hit, or the top of the list for nominations, but it is an honest, heart felt film and I think it is very under-rated, probably because isn't very well known. I saw it late one night I couldn't sleep and I was glad, for the first time in my life, that I hadn't been able to drift off, otherwise, I would have missed this gem.If you ever get the opportunity to watch the film do so. You won't regret it.

I frankly don't get it. What kind of taste, intelligence, knowledge of life, has the people that tell us it's a masterpiece?? I stopped seeing it about after 10 minutes run. I couldn't stand the look of those two (brothers?), the stupid script, the aging Baldwin... I'm quite disoriented by all these fabulous eulogies. Do they love anything that comes out of Hollywood automatically?? It doesn't matter that we see all the incongruence about mentioning things that didn't appeared until ten years or more later?? Are people that ignorant about the recent past?? They don't care if the historical period is reported inaccurately?? Every situation is so trivial, we have seen them a trillion times before. What was funny about the dialog?? Uff..., I have so many question that I better stop here because I don't give two hoots about this movie.