“”A young teacher, still green behind the ears, goes to teach at an elite institution sometime in the past (though at some of these places, time seems stuck in the 1950s or even earlier). While things are rough at first, the individual soon adjusts and even seeks to shake things up at this particular school. Some students take issue with the instructor’s methods, others seem overjoyed at this new learning style, and either way the leadership objects strongly at this bucking of tradition.
This familiar scenario is the one in which “”Mona Lisa Smile”” is set, with Professor Catherine Watson (Julia Roberts) being the recent teaching school graduate headed for conservative Wellesley College in 1953 to teach art history. While this seems like an esteemed place of higher learning, it is almost a finishing school, with many among its all-female student body biding their time till they receive a marriage proposal and then…no more education. Many accept this situation, but not the new Professor Watson, who winds up getting the girls to think about challenging the definition of art, to attend law school, to not feel pressured into marriage and the domestic lifestyle, and to generally move away from the rigid gender roles of the era. The film, told partially as a recollection by one of the students, begins with Prof. Watson coming to Wellesley to find things pretty rigid–even rigid considering the movie takes place in 1953, but that’s another matter–and runs into trouble early on. The administration wants her to adhere to strict rules, not just for teaching but how she conducts herself at home as she lives in campus-run housing (i.e., no men allowed at home). There is also a challenge from the students, who already seem to have her course’s syllabus memorized and read the required texts. In regards to those students, they fit the various stock types for these movies. There is the prissy girl who resents the new methods, the student who is more rebellious and welcomes a proverbial breath of fresh air in the classroom, and there’s the really talented character that doesn’t recognize her own potential. Their names are, respectively, Betty Warren (Kirsten Dunst)–whose mother also happens to be head of the alumni association, Giselle Levy (Maggie Gyllenhaal), and Joan Brandwyn (Julia Stiles)—plus Constance Baker (Ginnifer Goodwin) becomes significant as well, though mainly due to a romantic subplot with Betty’s cousin (and Mr. Rogers look-alike) Charlie (Ebon Moss-Bachrach).At home, Catherine lives with Nancy Abbey (Marcia Gay Harden), a professor of “”speech, elocution, and poise””, or rather she teaches the girls how to be proper housewives. On the other side of the political spectrum is fellow housemate Amanda Armstrong (Juliet Stevenson), the school nurse who apparently has a habit of handing out contraceptives—then against Massachusetts state law. Betty, as editor of the school newspaper, writes an expose on the nurse, who subsequently loses her job her job.In the meantime, Prof. Watson, after a disastrous first day of class–and one where she learns from faculty that she was not their first choice for the job–settles into her position, albeit with a method that challenges the curriculum. She shows a painting of what appears (?) to be a carcass, and this elicits a variety of reactions from the students, especially Betty who determines the picture to not be art; that distinction has to be made by the “people” she believes. The questions are, firstly, what constitutes the “people”, and then what defines art–as Catherine shows both a picture she drew as a kid and a photograph of her mother. The girls at the school are being groomed for the marriage/housewife thing for after, and even during, their college experience. However, Prof. Watson seeks to change that (pretty lofty for just a art history instructor) and tries to persuade Joan to head to Yale Law School after graduation, going so far as to practically fill out the application for this bright student. This idea does not sit well with friend Joan’s friend Betty, her of the old-fashioned outlook, or with potential husband Tommy Donegal (“”That 70s Show””‘s Topher Grace), who plans to attend grad school in Philadelphia, a “long commute” he feels from New Haven.Betty herself gets married and soon adjusts, as does everyone around her, to married life with Spencer Jones (Jordan Bridges). Shortly after, she begins missing many classes, irking Prof. Watson who comes to realize that married students are given a free pass when it comes to school-work. The Prof. herself experiences romance with a LDR with beau Paul Moore (John Slattery), and later meets up with Wellesley Italian instructor Bill Dunbar (Dominic West).who reputedly has flings with his students.The film has two themes (well more if one counts the romantic sub-plots, but anyway…): one is the role of women in 1950s America, and how colleges like Wellesley shaped that role; the second being the definition of art, be it more ‘traditional’ style paintings and sculptures, or more contemporary, and abstract, pieces such as those by Jackson Pollack. The movie certainly has interesting subject matter heading in, but gets sidetracked by romances. There also seem to be an abundance of Mona Lisa references in the film. It’s true that the title is “Mona Lisa Smile”, but it’s a little much how often the painting is mentioned, including the appearance of the song “Mona Lisa”, cropping up during a dance following Betty’s wedding. The most effective use, and one that refers to the movie’s name specifically, is a good scene late in the film involving Dunst.The flick is basic teacher-tries-to-change-the-students/institution stuff, though it provides somewhat of a variation by focusing on the rigid gender roles that women were forced into just a few decades ago. There is decent acting by some of the supporting cast (especially Dunst, Gyllenhaal, and Harden) –and certain scenes (like the interplay between Dunst and Roberts, and a darkly fun bit where Prof. Abbey tries to teach a class on being the perfect housewife) are fun to watch. However, there are a lot of romantic subplots—like those involving Roberts’ and Goodwin’s characters— that detract from the central theme, and many things in the film are predictable.The other concern is the editing, and the flow of scenes. One example is how there is a random scene of Prof. Dunbar teaching Italian, which crops up as a “”transition”” a romantic scene with him and Catherine, and then one with Constance and Charlie–why is this scene here? Also, there is a moment mid-way through where Catherine is treated to an induction of sorts by her students into a secret society, with the girls showing their appreciation–again, it was not firmly established that the students liked her all that much (Catherine was certainly different among teachers–but it was never specified that she was well liked by the students).So, this film features good acting, albeit for by-the-book roles, and an interesting premise going in, but is undone by all the romance and subplots that undercut the movie’s message, not to mention the editing/flow of scenes.(On a side note, look for Tori Amos to appear in a cameo, performing music from the era–and for Barbara Streisand to sing a rendition of Charlie Chaplin’s “Smile” during the closing credits.) Grade: C+