This is exactly the TYPE of movie I feel we need more of now, so I really wanted to like it, but sometimes that is not enough. I was originally drawn to this film by mere way of its casting and a few blurbs I'd read about it, making it out to be some indie wonder. The tastefully selected cast is primarily made up of actors who have broken through more recently like Ayo Edebiri and Jacob Elordi, obscure pseudo-celebs like Gibby Haynes and Andy Milonakis, transgressive underground NYC filmmakers like Betsey Brown and her brother Peter Vack, and no-names, and that alone spoke volumes to me.

When I started watching the movie, I discovered that it was directed by the DP of Good Time, one of my favorite movies of this entire century. With the tone and pacing of the first 15 minutes, I really thought I was going to love this movie. It moves quickly, barreling through people and places, almost faster than you can keep up with as a first-time viewer. The style of cinematography has a certain raw value reminiscent of 90's/2000's stalwarts like Harmony Korine or Larry Clark, or more modern films that also channel that energy like the wonderful American Honey. There is value in the believability of youth that is portrayed in this film's early segments - the true energy of college age kids going wild together is captured. Then, we hit the opening credits, which are also mystifying in their own way. Lead actress Talia Ryder lip syncs to a whimsical fairy-tale esque ballad while gazing at herself in the mirror - it is then that it becomes clear that Ryder will be the focus of the film, and it doesn't seem like a bad thing as she is gorgeous.

However, things change after the title card. The pace slows down to more of a butter churn for most of the remainder of the film, and the structure shifts into a rather familiar, and in this case, somewhat redundant, and aimless one. "She's on an aimless adventure and everyone wants her", would be the easiest way of summing it up. This is a structure I've seen so many times before, but most of the other ones I've consumed had a lot more meat on their bones. Talia Ryder is angelic, looks like a model in the most traditional sense, and is totally likable, but her character has more arc and depth in the first 15 minutes then she does throughout the entire rest of the movie, so sadly, eventually, fixating on her SO MUCH does lose its steam in this case. There's not enough character depth in the writing to justify the infatuation that the camera seems to have with her. More humor really would have helped give this movie wings to fly, but I rarely found it to conjure chuckles or leave you with any memorably witty dialogue. On top of this, half of the male characters who appear all seem to have the exact same personality - they all want to flex obscure historical tales and philosophies endlessly - this is funny for a few minutes but after some time, it's like "ok, yeah, we get it...what else?". Simon Rex is actually the king of this energy in this film, and leaves one of the most lasting impressions, almost returning to the vibe of his most recent celebrated role, Red Rocket, in which he portrays characters with arguably pedophilic tendencies. The rest of the male characters simply portray danger or un-trust, one-dimensionally.

As you could assume based off of the rest of this review, the journey goes nowhere. It only feels more aimless as it goes, and ends extremely abruptly. I really like what they were GOING for with this movie, but I just don't think it adds up to anything at all. Even as a tribute to the east coast in general, as it presents itself to be, it doesn't seem to hold much merit for viewers. It has flashes of brilliance but never more than flashes. Even some of the music choices are especially delightful, like putting a choice Minimal Man song over the ending credits, but those count as flashes.

Of course, I could be wrong, but this feels like the EPITOME of a case where the filmmaker chose Talia Ryder as a muse, and just wanted to make a film revolving around her (hence the "camera's obsession" with her throughout the entire film), yet struggled to find a story with any real purpose, inspiration, or cohesion, and maybe even knew that, but had an opportunity to make a movie with this cast, and did it any way. They also used this as a vehicle to have Ryder say "retarded" as many times as possible - the R-WORD is back, baby! Maybe this will be some magical experience for some teenagers or college-age kids, but as a 40-year-old artist, it left me wanting a lot more.

The 17-18 year old high school senior who is the supposedly "picaresque" main character in this flick is utterly obnoxious in her vacant, empty, amoral approach to life. In many ways she seems younger, more like a 13 or 14 year old perhaps who is worried about being seen as "cool" so she constantly degrades absolutely everything as boring. Furthermore, I recall at that age having ethics and even budding political beliefs, while Lillian blankly moves between anarchist, far right, and vaguely leftist groups with zero feeling or development of intellect.

A terrible incident occurs about 3/4 of the way through the film that is almost entirely her own fault. She is much too old to feign ignorance that the people whom she stole from were dangerous or that her bad behavior would result in significant consequences - in this case, death for innocent people whom she's lied to.

I don't find this film amusing, and the character isn't even believable as a young woman in her late teens. I have seen reviews comparing the effect of her character passing through American current events to Forrest Gump unwittingly witnessing 20th century history unfold in front of his naive face. However, Gump was a well-written, expertly acted, and ultimately sweet film about a kind but intellectually disabled man. The Sweet East is just is pretentious nonsense. Not even sure what the director was trying to say, the flick seems to hint that the film makers are guilty of pseudo-intellectual false equivalence comparing disparate 21st century American political views.