In which Lollipop Gomez and Marco Sparks have a little chit chat about Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist.
Marco Sparks: Okay, Lolli, I give you the hard part: How would you describe the plot of this movie?
Lollipop Gomez: The plot of the movie is: Two teenagers meet up at a club and spend a night together. That would be the bare bones of it, no?
Marco: Nothing about their shared love of music forming a bridge for a deeper connection for their souls to intertwine on accompanied by a fair to middling soundtrack?
LG: Yes, but I just don’t buy it here. In the book, much more.
Marco: I think it’s safe to say that we both enjoyed the book slightly more than the movie? How would you describe the book to someone who’s yet to read it (which is probably everyone)?
LG: A love song to music, being young, and possibility.
Marco: Nice.
LG: I still have some tricks up my sleeve.
Marco: More so than this movie, no doubt.
LG: Yes, obviously, though this movie did stick around in my thoughts for a while after I saw it.
Marco: There was times there as I watching it that I thought that perhaps I was in the middle of a really good movie, and times when I didn’t feel that at all. It’s hard to put into words, and really, I wasn’t crazy about Michael Cera in this film. His best moment was the bit at the end. The look he gives her before they take off together. That’s really the piece that salvaged the whole affair.
LG: Yes, that was a very genuine moment.
Marco: I’d say that the idea of a story of young love meeting cute/getting free of an old “love” mixed with love of music through the good and bad times mixed with the wacky hi-jinks and middle-level celebrity cameos just doesn’t all work together (though I did like that the writers of the book had a cameo together, and the screenwriter as well, who’s the hot chick that Seth Meyers of all people is making out with in his bit). Kat Dennings, on the other hand, was excellent in this movie. In addition to being gorgeous. I think she added a much needed sense of realism in places and really carried this beast on her shoulders.
LG: I think it couldn’t decide what kind of movie it wanted to be. And that’s versus the book which was clearly a love story first with the wacky hi-jinx second.

Marco: One thing I liked was that the film didn’t show you Where’s Fluffy. For a lot of reasons. In the book, the generic descriptions of this ultimate indie band that’s such a religious experience to see/hear/know of is kind of horrid. It was really uninteresting there and didn’t translate to the page very well and could’ve been even more disastrous on the big screen if the band just wasn’t that good. Think Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip, a show I liked for the most part, but “hilarious” SNL knock off that the show was based around was far from hilarious. The band worked better as not so much the macguffin, but the structure device, the end point to be reached. I liked that there was a line drawn, and that the music can only bring the young lovers so far before they have to turn away and be something on their own.
LG: I found that whole subplot to be a little grating. I know it was the vehicle they used to be the thing that they were chasing when we all know that they were really chasing each other, but it was cool how it all came together in the end. And I think not seeing the band really adds to the reality that they really are just chasing each other and then don’t need the band anymore. Feel free to edit that for me because I haven’t had too much coffee and can’t think yet.
Marco: I think you worded that perfectly.
LG: Thanks. One thing that I wished felt more natural in the movie was how Norah was known in the city, like that scene in the book where they go to the drag queen club and all the drag queens know Norah and start chatting up Nick. It was really nice and I wish it had made it into the film. That part of NYC kid life is very authentic. There are lots of kids with money who just walk around town like they own it and get into clubs and bars all the time based on the fact that they’re loaded.

Marco: Yeah, the movie did lose a little of that, didn’t it? I liked how the city new her pretty well and they knew the city pretty well also, despite being “bridge and tunnel.” Thanks, by the way, for letting me know what that meant.
LG: Technically I was “bridge and tunnel” (growing up in Brooklyn), but I knew the city very well because when you’re in high school you just bum around places until they kick you out because you have nowhere to go. It was totally not surprising that they would know it. That was a very realistic part of the plot. That or that they would only know a tiny part of the city.
Marco: All of this love letters to NYC crap makes me sentimental for old classic anti-New York cinema of Bill Murray. My next question for you then is, Michael Cera: Perfect casting, just so so casting, less than so so casting (as I would say), or an absolutely heinous matching of an actor to a role?
LG: Just okay casting. Would it kill him to show a little emotion every once in a while? But I think that Tyler Coates put it best:

Marco: I could not agree more. To me, that scene of Michael Cera fingerbanging Kat Dennings was a lesbian love scene.
LG: It wasn’t believable and was kind of embarrassing. For them, I mean, not for us. Like, yeah, we’re supposed to believe that Michael Cera is this amazing lover? Really? Really?
Marco: I could rattle off a long list of things that I think would be much more likely to give the Norah character her first orgasm in this film rather than little George Michael. That said, Kat Dennings (whom I’m glad has grown out of that phase where she looked like the hotter Hillary Duff) was absolutely beautiful in the moment right after, perfectly radiant in the afterglow.
LG: Yes.
Marco: Oh, and their whispering in the moment before that as the camera was panning around the studio, which was a moment that I liked from a technical standpoint rather than witnessing the mechanics of the fingerbang there, was all improvised, I learned from the commentary track. Which reminds me of how much I missed the good ol’ days of funny and interesting commentary tracks.
LG: Speaking of a little girl on girl action… What happened to the kiss at the diner between Nick’s ex (whose name I’ve forgotten) and Norah in the bathroom? Do you think they could’ve kept that in the movie without it being weird?
Marco: It could’ve only made the movie better. Her name was Tris, which was perfect casting for the role they made that character, which was definitely not the character from the book. It would’ve been an interesting scene to leave in, but didn’t fit the vibe they were going for, which was some kind of cutesy, Superbad-lite (while being more respectful to women, thankfully). But it brings up a good question of what other things would you like to have seen brought from the book that weren’t? And was there anything that the movie did that the book didn’t that you liked?
LG: I actually found Tris to be cast really oddly, because I knew those kind of girls that she was supposed to be (that kind of hot, tarted up young jail bait Suicide Girl type that works at Hot Topic) and that actress was way too squeaky clean to be in that role. I also thought she was styled in a way to make her look like a baby Russian prostitute. Even the dude I saw it with audibly cringed whenever she showed up on screen. That anyone in their right mind would want her versus angelic, fresh faced Kat Dennings was unbelievable. And that’s another thing that I liked about the movie, because Norah was supposed to be somewhat plain and reserved. But I can understand that they have to sell this movie, but I really like the book so much better than the movie and I don’t think that there is anything better about the movie.

Marco: You’re right, and Alexis Dziena usually gets cast as some kind of exotic-ish hyper-nymphet type, doesn’t she? And I get that they were trying to infuse more structure with the search for Caroline and Where’s Fluffy to make it more of a real film (and not something akin to Before Sunrise or Before Sunset like I think I was hoping for), but a lot of the stuff brought over from the book was so done so pathetically that you had to wonder why it was there at all. Like the Tikun Olam bit or just the stuff with them wandering around the streets of early morning NYC, getting to know each other. I was really hoping for more of that. Okay, Lollipop, final statement on Nick and Norah and their infinite playlist?
LG: Ehh. Michael Cera: You’re not too good for the Arrested Development movie. I promise you.
The Submarines “Xavia” (mp3)
The Honorary Title “Bridge And Tunnel” (mp3)
The National “All The Wine” (mp3)
The Real Tuesday Weld “Last Words” (mp3)


M83, Saturdays=Youth.
Lil Wayne, Tha Carter III.
Kanye West, 808s & Hearbreak.
Lykke Li, Youth Novels.
Crystal Castles, Crystal Castles.
Girl Talk, Feed The Animals.
Friendly Fires, Friendly Fires.
Common, Universal Mind Control.
Women, Women.
Surprisingly, or maybe not so surprisingly, Stereolab, Chemical Chords.
The Roots, Rising Down.
Los Campesinos, Hold On Now, Youngster… and We Are Beautiful, We Are Doomed.
Sigur Rós, Með suð í eyrum við spilum endalaust (which translates as With Buzzing In Our Ears We Play Endlessly).
The Onion AV Club‘s 





