In the world of movies there is the accepted adage that ‘the book is always better’ meaning movies are usually lesser forms of the stories told in the books they are adapting. However, there are exceptions to this rule and the recent adaptation of The Love Hypothesis is such an example. Perhaps that is helped by the novel in question being Reylo Star Wars fan fiction to begin with but I enjoyed this film more than the novel.

I have now read 2 of author Ali Hazelwood’s novels and I had the same problem with both books. She is too worried with her characters being non-problematic that they come across as phony with the dialogue feeling therapy coded and inauthentic. In The Love Hypothesis the characters are entering into a contract for fake dating but practically every conversation feels like it was pre-approved by the character’s shrinks rather than the clumsy awkward way humans actually talk.

I’m not saying I don’t want respect and consent to be a thing but I also don’t want to be reading a romance about robots who always say the right thing at the right time. This is particularly true for Hazelwood’s characters who are young college age or in this case graduate students. Like I said The Love Hypothesis gets a little bit of a pass because it started as Reylo fan fiction so it wasn’t meant to be a serious novel but when multiple books have this same problem it’s a turn off.

Anyway, back to the movie… in the adaptation by Sarah Rothschild, directed by Claire Scanlon, they take the story of the novel and minimize the therapy talk making it a part of flirty banter of the nerdy scientists. It also helps they have 2 leads in Tom Bateman and Lili Reinhart who have sizzling chemistry together. I also appreciate the little winks to Reylo in the direction (having Adam in all black, the way he walks, enters a room, the music playing at certain moments are a lot of fun.)

The plot is of course ridiculous but I must admit I’m a sucker for the fake dating trope. It almost always works for me. Also grumpy guy and sunshine girl is another favorite trope (and a favorite of almost every Hazelwood novel.) The movie is about 30 minutes longer than it needs to be (I really think these types of rom-coms are best at the 80-90 minute mark but maybe that’s just what I’ve been acclimated to with the Hallmark  formula films?)

That said, if you like a rom-com with witty banter between leads with good chemistry you’ll fall in love with The Love Hypothesis. Certainly if you liked the book you’ll love this film. It is on the spicy side like the book so be forewarned but it’s also a sexy, fun good time.

My patrons keep me honest and able to see and review as much as I do. Make sure you check out the patreon for perks, exclusive reviews and to be part of our monthly events and watch alongs. If you value honest criticism check it out. Find out more here.

This year at the Toronto International Film Festival one of the big themes was the bio-pic. Of the 20 films I saw at the festival 9 are at least semi-biographical or based on true events. One of the best of this group is from Oscar winner Sian Heder entitled Being Heumann. This is a crowd-pleasing story that had me thinking about my own life and even my experience needing some disability assistance at the festival.

I feel some degree of hesitancy in describing myself as a disabled critic or claiming to relate to the experiences portrayed in Being Heumann. Part of that is probably some internalized ableism but also because I know that my need for assistance is largely self-imposed. I can hear the people saying that getting help climbing stairs or waiting in line is enabling my obesity and how can I claim to relate to the experiences of people who are born with a disabled body? Even now as I write I can hear those voices in my head and feel conflicted about what my response is.

I guess I would say that disability is not necessarily a life-long condition. For example, if I break my leg and am on crutches nobody would disagree that I would be disabled and in need of assistance at that time. It’s the same with my body at the moment. Also not participating in the world because of my current body is not motivating or empowering to change my body. If anything participating in things like TIFF make it more likely to help me overcome the challenges my body faces.

At the end of the day, my body is what it is, and I needed help to participate. This is what’s important about Being Heumann. While there is inspiration to be found in the story of disability activist Judy Heumann, the point of the film is more subtle. Judy and her fellow protesters aren’t trying to be inspirational figures. They are just trying to enter buildings, move through rooms and communicate with their fellow humans. This seems like the most basic of expectations for a community to insist upon for all of its citizens and yet as the movie demonstrates this humanity had to be fought for.

One of the special parts about Being Heumann is all of the disabled roles are played by disabled actors. This usually isn’t the case with Hollywood and it gives an authenticity that adds a lot to the film. Judy is played by Ruth Madeley and she brings the right level of feistiness to the role while still having her share of flaws. I also appreciate the script allows her to be sexy while never feeling patronizing or inauthentic to her experience. I could even picture some leaving the film feeling like Judy is unlikable, but I actually think that is a good thing. The script allows her to have tunnel vision at times with even Judy having to accept the limitations caused by the disabilities of those she’s working with and fighting for. This is so much more effective than if she was portrayed as some kind of paragon of virtue.

I also appreciate the film is narrow in its focus. Instead of trying to portray Judy’s whole life or the disability rights movement it centers on the protests in 1977, which I was honestly unfamiliar with. I was aware of the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) passed in 1990 but had never heard of the sit-in that occurred in 1977 at the Federal Building in San Francisco. This year has been a great year for films inspiring me to learn more about history including Young Washington and The Uprising, and I would put Being Heumann in this group.

If the film has weaknesses it is with Mark Ruffalo and his portrayal of Joseph Califano, secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. He is the one that must sign section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which prohibited any entity that receives federal funding to discriminate against the disabled. Califano had to sign the regulations in order for them to go into effect and not go back into the cycle of congressional legislation (President Carter is kept completely clean from any wrong-doing in this film.)

Anyway, the portrayal of Califano is unfortunately cartoonish and Ruffalo often feels like he is in a comedy when everything else is quite serious. It would be nice if the script gave him one moment of humanity where he recognizes the simple requests of the protesters but he’s nothing but a big doofus.

That portrayal aside, Being Heumann is a crowd-pleasing film that profiles an important movement in American history led by wonderful people like Judy Heumann. It does have R rated content, but I certainly think it is fine for teenagers or anyone who can handle some mature language and themes. I’m certainly glad I saw it, and am grateful that I live in a world where getting help with my own disabled experience, as minimal as it might be, is even a possibility. Thank you to Judy and others for fighting that fight.

Check out my friend Kristen Lopez’s new book Popcorn Disabilities to learn more about the portrayal of the disabled in film https://amzn.to/3VrzEwd (ad)

My patrons keep me honest and able to see and review as much as I do. Make sure you check out the patreon for perks, exclusive reviews and to be part of our monthly events and watch alongs. If you value honest criticism check it out. Find out more here.