Film review

Me and You and Everyone We Know

2005 · Directed by Miranda July · 1h 31m · MPA R

In a sentenceMiranda July makes walking down a street look like quite enough romance for one day

ComedyDrama

Conceptual artist Christine Jesperson (Miranda July) becomes interested in shoe salesman Richard Swersey (John Hawkes). As they approach a possible romance, the film follows other people in their neighbourhood who are looking for love, company or a way to make themselves understood. Robby Swersey (Brandon Ratcliff), Peter Swersey (Miles Thompson) and Sylvie (Carlie Westerman) are among the characters whose encounters run alongside the courtship. The stories touch on art, loneliness and young people’s curiosity about sex, while Christine and Richard try to work out how to get closer to each other.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Miranda July’s neighbourhood comedy finds real feeling in an awkward courtship and has the patience to notice lonely people. Its insistence on being odd can grate, but the central pair make the effort worthwhile.

Miranda July’s Me and You and Everyone We Know is a funny, affecting comedy whose determination to be peculiar sometimes gets in its way. July writes, directs and stars, and she takes the small humiliations of wanting company seriously. The film asks us to spend time with people who struggle to say what they want, even when they have found someone willing to listen. At its centre are a conceptual artist, Christine Jesperson, and a shoe salesman, Richard Swersey.

July plays Christine, with John Hawkes as Richard, and their courtship gives the scattered neighbourhood stories something worth returning to. Hawkes helps make the hesitancy between them feel plausible; there is room to wonder what the other person has understood. July’s performance is more conspicuously odd, but she lets Christine seem needy without asking us to congratulate her for being different. Their scenes are sufficiently engaging that we begin to resent being taken away from them.

The scene in which Christine and Richard imagine their walk as the course of an entire relationship could have been unbearably pleased with itself. We were moved by it. Giving their possible future a place along the street lets them acknowledge feelings they cannot yet discuss directly, and both performers make the game seem worth the risk of looking foolish. The cleverness remains visible, but so does the embarrassment of wanting a shared life before there is much evidence that one will be offered.

Chuy Chávez’s cinematography makes ordinary surroundings worth looking at, giving even a street sign enough attention to interrupt our interest in the people. That watchfulness suits a film about characters hoping to be noticed. Aran Mann’s production design keeps the neighbourhood recognisable, so the odd behaviour has something ordinary to stand against. Michael Andrews’s music encourages the gentleness, sometimes more insistently than the courtship needs.

Editors Andrew Dickler and Charles Ireland preserve the loose movement between characters, allowing the film to feel sociable without pretending everyone belongs in the same story. At 91 minutes it is compact, though the succession of vignettes can make it feel longer. Some characters are defined so insistently by their odd behaviour that there is little else to become interested in. The art-world satire supplies some welcome jokes along the way.

The scenes involving young people’s sexuality are harder to accept on those terms. July’s deliberately flat treatment can make innocence difficult to distinguish from a failure to think about harm. We do not need a lecture about boundaries, but the light comedy sometimes moves on before the discomfort has been properly acknowledged. The generosity that serves the courtship so well feels less reliable here.

The neighbourhood ensemble comedy can become a parade of amusing minor characters, and July occasionally lets that happen. Her useful distinction is a willingness to let the search for company look embarrassing without making the lonely person the target. Christine and Richard benefit most from that kindness, and their tentative interest in each other survives the film’s fussier habits. Try it for the central pair, with some patience for the neighbours.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

61
Positive
4
Mixed
0
Negative
2

Most critics respond warmly to Miranda July’s debut, with praise gathering around her writing, central performance and sympathy for lonely people trying to connect. The favourable reviews find tenderness and humour in the awkward encounters, and welcome a lack of cynicism that makes the eccentric characters worth caring about. July’s handling of everyday details also earns attention. For her admirers, the film finds fresh ways to approach familiar anxieties about love and belonging.

The spread is wide, however, and the disagreement centres on how those eccentricities come across. Even some favourable reviews find the storytelling loose and the quirkiness overworked. The Guardian sees a smug, insistently cute film despite its funny lines and art-world satire. The New Yorker’s objection is more troubling: it finds the treatment of underage sexuality affectless and self-satisfied, while still admiring the casual richness of certain observational scenes.

Empire
· William Thomas
80*

Writer/director/star Miranda July has created a beguiling treat with her debut feature, whose freshness and honesty defy lazy 'indie' labels. The tender, original movie is a wonderfully uplifting experience that succeeds in saying new things about old anxieties.

Read the full review →
The Times
18 August 2005 · Wendy Ide
70*

July's debut is a whimsical one-woman show about fragile connections between strangers, with quirky characters and loose storytelling. It lacks cynicism and has real charm despite feeling written and overly quirky.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
20 June 2005 · Anthony Lane
40*

The critic finds the film creepy and unsavory in its flat, affectless handling of underage sexuality and pleased with itself in those moments. He praises certain observational scenes for their casual richness and the way the camera captures everyday details like a street sign.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
19 August 2005 · Peter Bradshaw
30*

The critic finds the film overly fey and quirky with a passive-aggressive cutesiness that requires high tolerance. It features funny lines and some art-world satire but ultimately reeks of indie smugness.

Read the full review →
IndieWire
14 June 2005 · Indiewire

The review celebrates Miranda July's assured debut as a warm, quirky exploration of loneliness and connection in the digital age. It highlights her empathetic handling of eccentric characters and offbeat humor.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
30 March 2005 · festival review

Performance artist Miranda July makes a captivating jump into the almost-mainstream with this neighbourhood character study. The film is a showcase debut that will convince cinemagoers they need to get in on the ground floor for this talented newcomer.

Read the full review →

Cast

Stills

Awards

Sundance Special Jury Prize for Originality of Vision Dramatic, 2005

Won
Sundance Special Jury Prize for Originality of Vision Dramatic

If you liked this, try…

The Station Agent poster82

The Station Agent

2003 · Another patient comedy about lonely people who do not immediately welcome company.

The Lunchbox poster

The Lunchbox

2013 · An uncertain courtship develops through small exchanges, with loneliness given proper weight.

Local Hero poster86

Local Hero

1983 · For gently peculiar encounters and a community observed with affection rather than fuss.

The Green Ray poster

The Green Ray

1986 · A less playful account of solitude, attentive to every awkward social encounter.

Kajillionaire poster

Kajillionaire

2020 · Another uneasy comedy in which eccentric behaviour cannot disguise a need for affection.