Movie Review: Ruby Sparks (2012)
Welcome to the world of Calvin, an introverted and socially inept novelist who is struggling to write his next book. After the success of his first novel, he faces pressure to do a follow-up. And his inability to do so is compounded by his firm idealism (or cynicism) in people which renders him unable to establish genuine connections with others, especially in romantic relationships.
On his therapist’s advice, Calvin begins writing about a girl who likes his dog. Calvin writes his vision of a perfect woman, who would be everything his heart desires and who would love him for who he is. It doesn’t take him long to realize that he is beginning to fall in love with his protagonist.
The name of the character? Ruby Sparks.
Then one day, Calvin finds Ruby.
In his kitchen.
As a real person.
What happens next is an examination of what it’s like to find someone whom for us is perfect—and whether such idea is constant enough not to change.
Ruby Sparks: A Quirky Take on Pygmalion and Galatea
What’s initially striking with “Ruby Sparks” is its novel spin on a modern-day Pygmalion falling in love with his creation; and that creation—Galatea—is everything perfect that his cynical heart has always wanted but never really expected. Upon watching it, however, “Ruby Sparks” is brimming with unabashed sincerity that makes us forgive its saccharine tendencies and sometimes-unfocused narrative.
It greatly helps that the lead actors, Paul Dano and Zoe Kazan, are a real-life couple. They play off each other with bouts of idiosyncrasy and shenanigan that are equally interesting and vexing, both sincere and frustrating. It’s that complicated balance of beauty and madness that can only be portrayed onscreen by two people whose chemistry can be traced back to a solid foundation; and Dano and Kazan have their long-term relationship as their cushion for emotional references.
A Movie That Says ‘No’ to the “MPDG” Stock Character
Ultimately, the biggest merit that makes “Ruby Sparks” stand out from other romantic comedy movies with the same boy-meets-girl narrative is this: While those movies support the idea of a Manic Pixie Dream Girl whose eccentricity could change a man for the better, this film actually rejects such notion. Kazan, who wrote the screenplay, openly dismisses the stock character with force. On the other hand, the film is actually a study of obsession with idealization, and we see that with Calvin. He thought that since he wrote Ruby the way he wants her, she wouldn’t change.
And that’s the biggest mistake any person could make, which just shows how little Calvin knows of human relationships. At the end of the day, after all, Ruby is a free spirit, woman or not. Without pigeonholing Ruby’s gender, this film subtly shows how complex every person actually is; each individual has his/her quirks that could either complement or turn someone else off upon interaction. Yes, a person could be perfect, but once interpersonal interaction comes into play, such notion of ‘the perfect one’ can change in no time.
“Ruby Sparks,” in all its schmaltzy tenderness, is in reality a case study of the dangers of idealizing a person, and containing that person’s whole individuality based on one’s idea of perfection.
‘Perfection’ is relative; it’s never constant.
It always evolves, and sometimes even devolves, into something bigger than what our hands—and heart—could handle.
