Easy A

This is a movie that's so hyperbolic and cheeseball on its tropes that I find it hard to take seriously, yet it insists that it's making a provocative statement that's amusingly more tepid than The Scarlett Letter which it draws upon. Gotta say, I've almost never seen a movie like this insist upon and flat out explain its inspirations. Yet despite how much the movie wants to insist it's smart in doing so, how much it insists Olive is smart for actually reading the book, I get the sense the creators of this film never read The Scarlet Letter themselves. At best it draws upon the most superficial aspects of the story, the idea of double standards towards women's sexual activities and the idea of how image hurts people. But I feel what's missing with Easy A is the context of why these things are taboo to begin with and what is the source of that. The Scarlett Letter is functionally a criticism of religious purity and the tragedy of that, but Easy A looks to flip the tragedy into a contemporary message of self-positivity but does so in a way I'd call daft.

Olive in this movie is lying to gain social clout and her insistence on lying would not make much sense if she felt there wasn't anything to gain from it socially. In contrast, The Scarlett Letter was painting the social stigma as something Hester Prynne could never recover from and not something she willingly embraced. Easy A relates to this as Hester taking the scrutiny with her chin up which encourages Olive to do the same, but it's such a baffling reading of The Scarlet Letter. Hester wasn't tolerating the scrutiny for some greater good, she was coping with it because she had no other choice but to do so. Easy A loves to play up the Scarlet Letter as this thing to draw moral lessons from but in the process undermines what made that story a tragedy. Hester is not a figure to hold as a blankly aspirational figure without considering the context of her tragedy. Yet Easy A views the imagery of that book as something to aspire to. It comes off as so laughably tone deaf to treat the "A" as a symbol of empowerment when that was utilized as a symbol of horror in the original context, especially since the meaning of "A" makes zero sense for the context of this movie. It wouldn't be so bad if they at least acknowledged the irony of this, maybe make some attempt to flip the meaning. But they're awkwardly having her wear the A as some confused defiance to social expectations without getting the meaning of what it meant, and all I could think was "...what?"

It's kinda funny that the movie lampshades the religious aspect of the Scarlett Letter by incorporating a group of Christian puritans but it's impossible to take seriously when it assumes they have far more clout than they realistically would. The Scarlett Letter was very specific about the Puritan group it was criticizing and there was a coherence to what their influence on the conflict was. Hawthorne had something to actually say about religious puritanism and what it does to society. Obviously a religious group like this holds less clout in a secular society but I feel there could still be more weight here. There could be something said about how religion still has influences on secular society, how the parents enforce these stigmas, or even how specific puritans have to come to terms as to what value these beliefs have in modern society. But nah, this movie has none of that. The religious group is at best portrayed as an obnoxious in group that barely provides a conflict. You could genuinely erase them from the plot and it's barely different. The scene where Olive goes to Church for advice lampshades how little they want to commit to discussing the religious dimension of this topic. Not only is it restricted to a few Christian groups (unironically, why doesn't she talk to Jewish groups about this?) but it lands on a twist regarding one pastor that makes Olive avoid the topic entirely. Like... what was the point, other than some cheeseball mockery of Puritans? Hawthorne held disdain for puritans but he at least articulated a point about them and held some sympathy for the world they lived in. Easy A feels compelled to do the bare minimum and thinks it's enlightened for doing so.

Now it might be unfair of me to dredge too much on the comparisons considering Easy A isn't running on the conceit that it's a recreation of The Scarlett Letter. However, the film itself insists on this comparison and I feel it's valid to push it. If we're going to ignore this comparison, what is this movie offering other than a Hollywood idea of a "hip" teenager and the most flaccid teen drama imaginable?

The conceit lands on the idea that Olive actively wants to be a martyr for the social needs of her peers out of her own good will but I do not believe for a second any girl would ever want to do this. It's hard to take this seriously because what girl, in any universe, would want to paint themselves as a whore to make some sleazy fat guy they barely know feel better about their sex life? The idea here is that Olive is falling down the rabbit hole of altruism to the point others are taking advantage of her, yet I find it unbelievable that even someone touted as morally pure and self-aware as this would cater to someone obviously making selfish demands of her. Its point also doesn't land because there's hardly any emotional struggle for Olive. There's barely any baggage with how people are perceiving her that makes her be tormented in the way Hester Prynne was. The most that happens is people giving her looks and being a little uneasy about the way she dresses. Even then, how is it that being treated like a literal whore doesn't bother her in the slightest, considering how many unsolicited and awkward comments this pushes on to her? Something like this should be far more socially damaging to a young woman. This could be read as a woman owning her sexuality and trying to express self-liberty but doing so here just comes off as awkward when we're looking at literal high school children. Yeah, I get that high school kids fuck all the time but it's really awkward to try to frame that as a form of female empowerment. Even divorced from that, I don't exactly think the idea of a high school girl embracing the identity of being a whore and somehow not feeling the psychological effects of that screams "sexual liberation."

There's a framing that paints her made up activities as arbitrarily painting a more negative image of her than it does the men involved. There's a valid point to that, sure. But it falls on deaf ears when the movie seems afraid to address this specifically and instead lean on how her actions affect her relationship with a few specific people. The point that's "bad" isn't that the people are bad for looking at her and treating her in this way as a double standard against women, the point that's bad is that she lied about herself and was willing to lead a life based on that lie. But it's the fact it was a lie at all than it is what the lie is that holds weight, and that undermines so much of its point. Are we supposed to think of Olive as empowered for embracing the lie for no point other than attention and clout makes her morally righteous, but the fault in that is she's being dishonest? That everyone was justified in treating her that way for being sexually provocative? Seriously, what the fuck?

I think the only reason this move gets any praise at all is because Emma Stone is effectively charismatic. People find attractive women who can be effectively deadpan and sarcastic to be charming. But I actually think this works against the film's conceit. In what world would a girl that looks THIS attractive and is THIS self-confident in themselves ever going to lack attention from anyone within a high school setting? Why should I believe someone like her would even crave widespread attention when avoiding the barest social interactions is what causes her to make the lie to begin with? It becomes more laughable how much of its climax and ending are contrived to make it the happiest possible ending. Of course an extremely attractive man restores her faith in humanity and is her final reward in the narrative. Of course everyone who doesn't side with her ends up looking socially pathetic. It frames itself as being socially conscious and intelligent without having much to say about anything or even understanding its inspirations. In reality, it's a dime a dozen teen drama film but ends up being far more pretentious and self-aggrandizing than most in a way I could only define as insufferable and dishonest with itself.