There has been no shortage of lovable Jewish male movie characters in the recent past. The clumsy and uncouth Stiller, Sandler and Rogen types do almost everything wrong until their not-that-badness unfolds, usually in a midstory montage, exposing a tenderness that leads them to whatever home base they desire.
(The end of the run is usually the shiksa goddess — most recently embodied by Katherine Heigl in “Knocked Up.”)
Jewish women, on the other hand, rarely make the cut. Should they appear, the odds are on a hand-wringing mother.
So when Gwyneth Paltrow was set to play Dora Epstein in her brother Jake Paltrow’s new film, “The Good Night,” there was some hope. Too young and hot to be cast as a mother, there was a chance that Paltrow might incorporate her ethereality into the role — a bit of lightness into the typically dark and heavy Jewess.
Instead, we get Paltrow veiled by brown contact lenses, a dumpy wardrobe and an unkempt mess of brown curls falling down her back. And if that weren’t enough to prevent us from mistaking her for the Gwyneth her single-name recognition has come to represent, she is also not curious, patient or gracious. What she does do — the base for all Jewish female jokes that are not about lack of sex — is nag.
Literally for the whole movie, she nags. She stops only at the end, when (spoiler alert) the target of her nagging gets hit by a car.
In an interview with New York magazine, Paltrow, whose father was Jewish, said, “It was me physicalizing my New York Jewish half.” (She reverted back to her pretty and pleasant state for the photo shoot that accompanied the story. It features a blond-haired, doe-eyed Paltrow with a branch of leaves slightly tousling her straight and shiny mane.)
While it is hard to see how much of the character was a creation of the director and how much of it the invention of the actor, the end result was a missed opportunity. Dora Epstein, a smart girl in a fatigued relationship, could have been rendered with a bit more depth and ambivalence. Her dissatisfaction with the relationship revealed itself as stony repulsion, when it could have, like her partner’s in the movie, been part of an ennui-driven quest for meaning and understanding. (Even as the supporting role, Paltrow has revealed herself capable in past projects.)
For Paltrow, New York female Jewishness translates to a pestering, sexless creature, devoid of any sensuality and emotional generosity. This reading is, to anyone who has had the pleasure of acquainting himself with any of the Jewish women of New York, tired ground.
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
To post a comment, click to login:
Copyright © 2012, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
So you identify a film as "Jewish" and then you attack it. Typical "Forward" supercillious article. If it's Jewish then it must be criticized. Give me a break. It's just a movie with a character who has a Jewish name. "It's not a Jewish movie."
Wonder if this physicalizing of Gwyneth Paltrow's Jewish half was a one shot deal. An interesting follow up would be to see how this following up is playing out in the raising of her children.
Ah, from your description, this movie sounds really lame. Oh well, I don't need Gwyneth Paltrow to be held up as some kind of big deal representation of Jewish women. Movies don't run very deep anymore..everything is homogenized and the cheezy stereotypes recite their uninspired lines...... So, back to reality-- We know that there are a hell of a lot of fun, intelligent, beautiful, enchanting Jewish women out there. Let's support and celebrate each other more. I want to know more real life stories about heroic women walking in our midst.
What Lucy said. Word. Thanks to the editor for listening.
Give her a break. She's a Gentile playing a Jewish role-why should she get it right. I pity her kid being named after a huge tech corporation with an egomaniac leader.
A fascinating story pointing out the never ending self-hating character of our community. Jewish women only nag, while other women are totally desirable. Enough! As a dynamic, visionary businesswoman with dramatic passion, I've struggled for more than a year to start an amazing, revolutionary, yiddish-style quick serve restaurant (chain). Who has come forward to back me? Gentiles. Only Gentiles. So much for remembering the Holocaust and helping each other. Understand that not all of us are pampered, spoiled, members of the nouveau riche. However, everyone will enjoy the modern, bold, healthier food I'm trying to manufacture, since the restaurant idea has bitten the dust. Stop the stereotyping! It's 2007 and it's not appreciated! From a very sensous, dynamic Jewess. Stop being afraid and ashamed. Be all you can be, Live.
Criticism is easy. Insight is not. "To judge me by my smallest deed is to reckon the power of the ocean by the frailty of its foam." All of us fall short, give her a chance to grow and learn. What do we truly know about her interior state? Criticism, yes, coupled with words of encouragement and love. This is the only way to engender in another person, self-reflection and productive change. Spiritual goal must become a part of what we do and say if we hope to change behaviors and make this a better world. Mere criticism is self-serving and unenlightening. You cannot be truly spiritual in one domain of your life and "critical" in another. Its time for a change, consistent with truth and understanding. You have one job, to speak the whole truth. Yes, I'm sure even movie critics, perhaps especially on this website, can appeal to a higher authority, a "higher critic." Thank you for allowing me to speak.
Two thoughts regarding this article: The final paragraph reads: “For Paltrow, New York female Jewishness translates to a pestering, sexless creature, devoid of any sensuality and emotional generosity. This reading is, to anyone who has had the pleasure of acquainting himself with any of the Jewish women of New York, tired ground.” I've read it through a few times now, and I'm not getting it. I assume it is not saying that Jewish women of NY really act like the caricature of a Jewish nag portrayed in this write-up. But no matter how I pull apart the grammar, it sounds to me like the author HAS written that the reading Paltrow gives Dora Epstein IS synonymous with "any of the Jewish women of New York..." Meanwhile, after spending some time researching this movie and watching a (hard to find) trailer of it, what I see is that Gwyneth Paltrow’s character seems to be what the movie calls for. The girlfriend seems to be a caricature, but since it is all from the perspective of the dreaming-his-life-away boyfriend, that might make sense. Brother and sister, Jake and Gwyneth Paltrow made one serious error in their decisions about the girlfriend: they chose a stereotype for a character, but then gave the character a name to match. It lacks respect both for their abilities, and for the audience to give the girlfriend a Jewish name. Dubbing her "Dora Epstein" was a poor and shallow choice. If they wanted to give her a name that fit the character without opening themselves to the charge of perpetuating a stereotype, they could have gone with something like “Emma Frost.”
When a shiksa goddess admits to having a "New York Jewish half" we should embrace her, even if we did not like her performance in this movie. We need more people to admit and embrace their partial Jewish heritage and we should accept them with open minds and hearts. This is similar to the advice I would give to Orthodox Jews to accept and embrace Conservative and Reform Jews.
I.M.O., Gwyneth Paltrow got it right. Because, as a Jewish man [not male, but man], whose had relations with both Jewesses & goyas [I find shiska too derogatory]: Jewish women are the most unappreciative women and exceedingly intolerant. In Jewish mothers, this obviously manifests in, their constant complaining [a.k.a. nagging] about how no good and unsuccessful their children are -- no matter what accomplishments their children make.
I.M.O., Gwyneth Paltrow got it right. Because, as a Jewish man [not male, but man], whose had relations with both Jewesses & goyas [I find shiska too derogatory]: Jewish women are the most unappreciative women and exceedingly intolerant. In Jewish mothers, this obviously manifests in, their constant complaining [a.k.a. nagging] about how no good and unsuccessful their children are -- no matter what accomplishments their children make.
I.M.O., Gwyneth Paltrow got it right. Because, as a Jewish man [not male, but man], whose had relations with both Jewesses & goyas [I find shiska too derogatory]: Jewish women are the most unappreciative women and exceedingly intolerant. In Jewish mothers, this obviously manifests in, their constant complaining [a.k.a. nagging] about how no good and unsuccessful their children are -- no matter what accomplishments their children make.
I.M.O., Gwyneth Paltrow got it right. Because, as a Jewish man [not male, but man], whose had relations with both Jewesses & goyas [I find shiska too derogatory]: Jewish women are the most unappreciative women and exceedingly intolerant. In Jewish mothers, this obviously manifests in, their constant complaining [a.k.a. nagging] about how no good and unsuccessful their children are -- no matter what accomplishments their children make.