super1.jpg

Morals and Ethics and Carnal Forbearance

Superbad / Daniel Carlson

Film Reviews | August 17, 2007 | Comments (141)


Seth Rogen has said that he started working on the Superbad script when he was 13, and it’s not hard to see he’s probably (hopefully) telling the truth: The film shares an 8th-grader’s unabashed love of all things sexual, its characters walking around in a perpetual hormone-fueled haze as they try in their own ways to get laid, and it’d be a little unsettling if Rogen at 25 was able to churn out a screenplay so in love with its own penis. Thankfully, Rogen — who co-wrote the script with Evan Goldberg — has matured since then, meaning both that he’s found a way to take that humor based on sexual humiliation into the mainstream, and also to pull the mainstream a little closer to him. There’s no denying this is a good time for Rogen and cohort Judd Apatow, who directed Rogen in Knocked Up and serves as a producer on Superbad. Their brand of blue humor, funneled through characters dealing with the existential shame of being losers in high school, is consistently entertaining, and make no mistake: Superbad is one damn funny movie, filled with gross-out gags and verbal riffs and absurd plot twists and enough pure hilarity that I missed several lines of dialogue because everyone in the theater was simply laughing too hard for anyone to hear what was being said onscreen. But it’s telling that the film from director Greg Mottola — who also helmed a few episodes of “Arrested Development” and Apatow’s own “Undeclared” — had more downtime than Apatow’s comedies, in addition to being burdened by a running time of almost 2 hours, which makes for a draggy and often directionless second act. Superbad is hilarious, but also — at the risk of sounding like an obvious moron — more than a bit shallow. But I guess in that way it’s a lot like its teenage characters, and it’s hard to find too much fault in it when it tries so hard.

Superbad opens with a vintage-looking Columbia Pictures logo and colorful credits scored to 1970s funk, but the film is set in the present: The first onscreen communication between high school seniors and social outcasts Evan (Michael Cera) and Seth (Jonah Hill) is via cell phone while Seth drives over to pick Evan up for school, their conversation casually turning to what kind of porn sites Seth plans to subscribe to when he’s away at college next year. The weird hodgepodge of time periods is perhaps the greatest defining characteristic of culture here in the first decade of the new millennium; while the ’70s, ’80s, and ’90s each had their own (often terrible) signposts of individuality, the ’00s are all about throwing the past 30 years in a blender and pulling out whatever feels cool at the moment, which is how Seth can wear a Richard Pryor T-shirt and Evan can wear the kind of long-sleeved polos that one assumes kids wore to math camp two decades ago and no one says anything funny about it. As soon as the boys meet up and head off for school, talk turns to the subjects that tend to clog the brains of most 17-year-old guys: namely, erections, women, and all conversational and physical combinations thereof. Cera and Hill have fantastic chemistry together, bantering back and forth with the unrepressed ease of real friends who have a history of sticking by each other because no one else will, and they dive into the sex-obsessed shoptalk with reckless abandon. It’s part of Cera’s innate charm that he can remain nebbish and eager and somehow innocent even while trading horribly filthy insults with Hill, who embraces wholeheartedly the persona of the goofy frat boy whose simple lusts cover up a slightly more nuanced character.

The main plot starts to unfold when the boys are in Home Ec., where Jules (Emma Stone) tells Seth she’s having a party and she’d like it if he came, in one of the plot points that strains reality a bit but still gets things moving. Seth is in love with Jules, or at least in lust with her, and hopes that the party will provide a chance for him to get her drunk enough to lower her standards so that she’ll sleep with him, allowing for a summer of steady lovemaking after graduation, which is only a couple weeks off. Evan has high hopes for the party, too, since it’s where he plans to make a move on Becca (Martha MacIsaac), the cute girl who keeps flirting with him in math class — seriously, there’s something in the water these girls are drinking. In order to impress Jules, Seth tells her he can get liquor for the party, which means using the fake ID belonging to Fogell (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), the kind of wiry, squeaky-voiced, oddly hip-hop inspired geek that’s at every high school in America. Fogell is clueless and a little belligerent, but ultimately well-meaning; he’s like a young Dwight Schrute in a Metallica T-shirt, and genuinely excited about the fact that his fake ID simply calls him “McLovin.”

So the boys set out to score alcohol, only to run into a piling series of misadventures as they try to make it to the party; in its rambling about town and fetishization of women, it almost feels like Mystery Date with better jokes. It’s a smart choice to have so much action happen before the party in question, creating more tension in a somewhat realistic setting that allows the characters to go down random paths instead of just getting the booze, getting hammered at someone’s house, and getting into trouble. But the middle third of the film bogs down in just a few too many punch lines that don’t quite work, and in plot twists that are merely random for their own sake: Fogell has a run-in with a pair of cops (Rogen and Bill Hader) and winds up riding around time with them for a while, drinking and shooting stuff, while Evan and Seth try to come up with back-up plans for getting money and/or alcohol and/or transportation to the party. Mottola keeps the film tightly paced in its first and third acts, balancing plot and humor and keeping things moving a steady clip; excising 15 minutes from the murky second act would have greatly improved the flow. As it is, it’s almost exhausting watching everything that happens to the central trio before they ever get to the party, and even then they’ve got a ways to go.

Cera and Hill are masters at their respective personas by now, and they have to be. They create two likable, relatable schlub-heroes, but the respective women in their lives are as interesting as cardboard. At least Stone is blessed with a natural spark she showed briefly on the short-lived “Drive” and gets to display in a few choice scenes here, especially her interactions with Hill at the party. But MacIsaac has been cast simply because she’s 23 and looks good in just a bra and has no qualms about portraying the kind of interchangeable female archetype — the nice-dirty girl as envisioned by a guy who just got his driver’s license — that is the stock in trade of teen comedies, even ones written by men as smart and talented as Rogen.

In addition to shoving the girls into short-shorts and not letting them say much — no woman is seen onscreen who isn’t talking to a man — the film takes a similarly hypocritical approach to morality, at once celebrating teen drinking (as all teens do) but drawing the line at actually having sex with someone who’s drunk, unless you’re also drunk, I think. To be honest, it’s among the film’s weaker moments when Mottola attempts to inject what could only be called righteousness into the lives of these characters, especially since they haven’t seemed to desire or earn it by their trials in everything that’s come before. Superbad is a little schizophrenic like that, bouncing back and forth between philosophies like its emotionally mercurial characters. Most teens don’t know what they want to be when they grow up, and that’s fine, and even good. But now that Rogen is an adult, it would be nice to see him focus his energies on the stories that he can tell better, like the one about the guy who sleeps with the girl and gets her pregnant, only to decide it’s time to step up and be responsible. Superbad is like seeing a friend from high school after you’ve entered that new stage in life: All you have to talk about is the past, and what it was like to be young and dumb. But it still makes you laugh the big laughs, and that, at least, counts for something.

Daniel Carlson is the managing editor of Pajiba and a low-level employee at a Hollywood industry magazine. You can visit his blog, Slowly Going Bald.









Invasion, The | Who Wants to Be a Superhero?













Comments

Mmmmm, I expected no less out of this crew, I'll see it.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 17, 2007 6:39 PM

Gack! I loved this start to finish and I thought it was sneakily sweet to the core. Much like Rocket Science, only for the mainstream. "Felash!" Hah!

Posted by: redbeaniegirl at August 17, 2007 6:40 PM

SPOILERS BELOW

Raising Helen is an "American Movie Classic"?

Oh, and good review. I agree with the middle third being a bit clumsy, but I thought the scene at the party where Cera declines sex was pretty spot on. Ive been in and reacted to that situation the same way. I dont see anythign strange about wanting to fuck, but not wanting to take advantage of anyone to do it. And its happened more than once for me.

Other than that good review. Seen it twice already this week and am going again tonite with a bunch of friends to the drive in. Gonna get hammered. Woot!

Posted by: Jason at August 17, 2007 6:40 PM

P.S. Ive been to this site every day this week just to hear what the Pajiba crew thought of this flick. ¡Viva Pajiba!

Posted by: jason at August 17, 2007 6:44 PM

Oh! Spoiler! Uncool!

Posted by: redbeaniegirl at August 17, 2007 6:48 PM

Dangit, that spoiler came out of nowhere, Jason! A little warning next time, please.

I'm planning on seeing this, although I don't expect it to be funnier than Knocked Up - which is what everyone seems to be saying. I have a feeling I'll feel much the same about it as Daniel did.

Posted by: Kolby at August 17, 2007 7:23 PM

I apologize, but...

The only spoiler in what I wrote is also IN THE REVIEW up there....

"the film takes a similarly hypocritical approach to morality, at once celebrating teen drinking (as all teens do) but drawing the line at actually having sex with someone who's drunk, unless you're also drunk,"

Posted by: Jason at August 17, 2007 7:31 PM

Simmer down, jason didn't say anything that wasn't already in the review.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 17, 2007 7:33 PM

Seriously, no point in going now.

Well, while we're spoiling things, she's her sister and her daughter. She and her father . . . get it?

Posted by: denadn at August 17, 2007 7:35 PM

I guess everyone has gone out seeing this.

*whistles, then weeps.*

Posted by: Vermillion at August 17, 2007 8:39 PM

Do spoilers really matter in this kind of comedy? Isn't it just about the hilarity and not the plot?

Posted by: Lainie at August 17, 2007 9:30 PM

So I went to the cinema to see this.

*SPOILER ALERT*

They were selling Popcorn in the lobby and I bought some and...
*SPOILER ALERT*

I sat down along one of the middle rows and waited for the...

*SPOILER ALERT*

you see where I'm going with this.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 17, 2007 9:40 PM

I wanted this movie to be good so hard...it's going to be a while before it is released in my country but I'm whiling to wait...a reasonable time(I saw Knocked Up through a pirated copy because it doesn't even have a release date in my country)

Posted by: Radlum at August 17, 2007 9:41 PM

...teen comedies, even ones written by men as smart and talented as Rogen.

Ha ha ha! That was a joke, right?

In addition to shoving the girls into short-shorts and not letting them say much -- no woman is seen onscreen who isn't talking to a man...

I am sooo not seeing this movie. Furthermore, I still can't understand why seemingly intelligent people will watch this movie, acknowledge that every woman on the screen is portrayed solely as a potential sperm receptacle, then declare the writer of said movie "smart and talented." It doesn't take that much "talent" to essentially remake American Pie.

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at August 17, 2007 10:18 PM

Hey Bianca, if you're trying to reinforce the stereotype that feminists don't have a sense of humor, it's working.

Posted by: Johnny at August 17, 2007 10:40 PM

What would've truly frightened me is if someone had foolishly grabbed a bottle of red Cisco (see bumwine.com). Then it would've gone from relatable to my own life story, although the mention of a 10th grade "Citizen Kane", yep that was stolen from me, and I laughed my head off all alone.

Bill Hader's reminiscences are what brought me to tears, a great example of slippping out punchline after punchline as throwaway lines. Yeah, the Becca character was pretty much a plot device, but I thought Jules was nicely subtle, you find out what she's really on about without her having to actually state it.

Oh, and play "Spot The Haverchuck"!

Posted by: Jay at August 17, 2007 10:54 PM

"I am McLovin"

Posted by: kimmyhula at August 17, 2007 11:02 PM

Johnny, I am a feminist, and I'm pretty funny, if I do say so myself. The two are not mutually exclusive. Also, humor is not absolute. Just because one segment of the population finds misogynistic films entertaining does not mean that the rest of the population necessarily feels the same way.

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at August 18, 2007 2:11 AM

STFU, Bianca. Obviously you haven't been a teenage boy. Plus you don't have a sense of humor or perspective.

Posted by: Allen at August 18, 2007 2:41 AM

"Just because one segment of the population finds misogynistic films entertaining does not mean that the rest of the population necessarily feels the same way"

True, but you don't need to go out of your way to say you're not going to see a movie many others are excited about and then assume that you're so smart because you've chosen to stay away and not see it. The sad fact is that standing around complaining about a movie you seem despise yet haven't seen makes you a complete fucking idiot. So go and get off your soapbox please.

Posted by: dave at August 18, 2007 2:42 AM

I think the moral lesson of not nailing a chick while she is drunk is an easier one to get across than the one about teenagers not drinking. Its probably nearly impossible to keep teenagers from drinking. As a guy, it barely registers that underage drinking could be seen as immoral. Its more of a thing frowned upon because you just aren't old enough to do it responsibly. Fucking a girl while she is drunk shows up pretty big on the moral radar. Unless I was completely hammered, it would be hard for me to justify it. So that part of the movie worked for me.

Posted by: Dave at August 18, 2007 2:53 AM

I'm a feminist and I pretty excited to go see this movie.

Just sayin'.

Posted by: Margaret Moony at August 18, 2007 3:00 AM

So we saw this and wow, I loves me some vulgarity. I'm a girl and I appreciate guy humor, so sue me! Cera was so good..."Good mor- GOOD MORNING!" So funny.

And that's really what Hawaii IDs look like. P.S. Momona Street? "Momona" in Hawaiian means "fat." Ha.

Posted by: Corinna at August 18, 2007 3:11 AM

If you have a problem with someone stating their opinions, don't read the comment threads.

Bianca is right, if Rogen were really so smart and talented, he'd figure out a way to portray females better in his work rather than rehashing the same old Hollywood archetypes.

Teenage boys aren't the only people in the country, their views and perspectives aren't the only ones that matter, yet the majority of entertainment developed and produced is for them. It sucks for women to be repeatedly objectified and demeaned in popular media (and then the perpetrator PRAISED for doing so!), and Bianca has the right to point that out.

"It's just a joke! You just don't get it!" No, YOU don't get that it's not a joke when society takes those "jokes" and makes it reality by subjugating women and devaluing their contributions.

Feminism is not a dirty word, and being a feminist is nothing to be ashamed of.

Posted by: hoorah at August 18, 2007 3:23 AM

Ugh. Seriously? We're taking the comment section to that place? We're taking a turn into negative town? Soapboxies, whatever your message: shut up. This isn't the place, honestly.
Oh, I don't even know what to say that would make you understand why intellectual people watch this movie. It's just funny. I suppose it's assy of me to suggest you see this movie before you get all high horse.
Unless you're the King (sorry, Queen) of Hollywood, there's nothing you can do to stop movies like this IF they're genuinely funny. Movies that aren't funny and bash women with no positive message have never been supported here. I dunno, I just find this kind of ranting without having watched the movie obnoxious and harpy. Really: Go see it. It's hilarous! The girls are probably on screen maybe 10% of the movie. The rest is all McLovin.

P.S. Does wanting to stay home and raise babies and be a housewife make me a feminist?

Posted by: MaliceAlice at August 18, 2007 3:46 AM

this thread has taken a wierd turn


*cue in Twilight Zone music*


Anyway, it has been MY experience here that it is preferable to debate the merits instead of telling people to "STFU" or to " "go away". So if *I* were to disagree with Bianca, I would try to argue my points no go all "AiCN" on her and risk looking, you know,.... like a douche.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 18, 2007 7:32 AM

In support of Bianca, I'll just point out that nearly every time a review comes up on this blog, someone says that they won't be seeing the movie for X reason. It could be that they don't like the main actor, they don't like the producer, the writer, the director, or they liked the book and heard that the movie sucked. In other words, they form an opinion without seeing the movie. Bianca doesn't like the premise of this movie. Not only is that a legitimate reason for not going to it, it's also perfectly acceptable for her to post it here. For her to then be called a "feminist with no sense of humor" and to be told to STFU is absurd and inappropriate and inaccurate (at least in Bianca's case: I've read her blog and have found her to be bright and quite funny.)

BarbadoSlim is right in his final paragraph: Anyway, it has been MY experience here that it is preferable to debate the merits instead of telling people to "STFU" or to " "go away". So if *I* were to disagree with Bianca, I would try to argue my points no go all "AiCN" on her and risk looking, you know,.... like a douche.

Posted by: Shannon at August 18, 2007 9:43 AM

What the...? I go to bed with barely a comment here, and wake up to this?

I thought we had mature adults here; adults who were capable of discussing a film without breaking down into chaos. True, we have our occasional troll or misinterpretation, but we try to maintain our civility and decorum despite them.

Now, Bianca does have a point. And she has every right to take issue with the movie. Does that mean I have to agree with her? No. But it also doesn't mean I have to be a jackass about it. If she doesn't want to see the movie and expresses why, then suck it up and accept that not everyone is jumping up and down in anticipation for the movie.
Both BarbadoSlim and Shannon have expressed quite well that this is common for many movies, and folks shouldn't get upset because of this one. I mean dammit people, it isn't like she is holding a gun to your head and making you stay away from the theater.

Where was I? Oh, right.

Bianca: I see your point, but your post is basically saying people are stupid for wanting to see this movie. And one thing I learned hanging around Pajiba (and apparently this thread) is that people don't like being called stupid. You may not have meant it that way, I can't read your mind. But the whole "I still can't understand why seemingly intelligent people will watch this movie" really does sound like that. And it is really unfair.

I have not seen the movie, so I can only go on what is in the review. I disagree that Superbad is a retread of American Pie. In Pie, the pursuit of women was portrayed as a contest, a competition to see who could go the furthest. Here, the leads just want to be with their respective girlfriends. No wagers, no showing of trophies, no bragging. In fact, they only focus on those girls, instead of jumping from intended hookup to hookup, searching out for whatever woman is desperate enough to sleep with them. Yes, they are focused on sex, because they are teenage boys, with hormones and society blaring at them that they have to be.

It is funny that you take issue with the portrayal of the females, but you don't take issue with Daniel's comment on their attraction to the leads, saying that they must be "something in the water" in order for them to be remotely interested in them. Yes, it is pretty much a retread of the Knocked Up argument, but seriously, why is it so hard to believe that a woman might be attracted to these guys? Is that to say that 'real' women wouldn't even consider giving them the time, just like in EVERY OTHER MOVIE? Isn't that, I don't know, a bit shallow?

I could be wrong, because like I said, I haven't seen the movie. And I will be the first to admit it if I am. But I will be seeing this movie, because I do find the writers and actors funny AND smart. The trailers made me laugh, and it is a lot more interesting to me than most movies. So, I would like to give it a shot. If that is so wrong, then sue me.

Posted by: Vermillion at August 18, 2007 10:05 AM

I saw this movie last night. I consider myself a feminist. I spent a couple of hours laughing and not thinking about the shitty week I had at work. So for me, it truly served its purpose.

It's true, the girls in this movie didn't have much screen time. But it's a movie about not-so-popular high school boys--how much face time do you expect them to have with girls?

Bianca--I disagree that the girls were portrayed merely as "sperm receptacles." The female characters weren't as developed as the main (male) characters, but neither were the other minor characters (people at the party, parents, etc.)
Because it's a teenage, coming-of-age film, Superbad will inevitably be compared to American Pie but they're not the same. Superbad is more like American Pie's kinder, smarter cousin. See it or don't, but don't assume that because it's a movie about boys, it's automatically misogynistic.

Posted by: kimmyhula at August 18, 2007 10:35 AM

I hope the reason the women in this movie are one-dimensional is that Seth Rogan has never been a woman and doesn't know how to write for them yet. After all, not everyone can be Judd Apatow right out of the gate.

As for the concept that feminists have no sense of humor, let me remind you of the definition of the word feminism: "the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men". From what I can tell, every contributer to this site and well over 90% of the commenters fit this definition (at least in the world of entertainment) and are therefore feminists. Stop doing to the word "feminist" what's been done to "liberal".

Posted by: Wendi at August 18, 2007 11:02 AM

OK, I am definitely a feminist and I went to see an advanced screening of this film with five of my closest feminist friends (one a lesbian, one transgender-for some reason I think that scores some feminist points) and we laughed our bums off with glee! I thought the chicks (yeah I said chick, I'm reclaiming the term) in the film, though not main characters, we're a refreshing change from the bubble-headed vacuous blondes of other films (Reid and Suvari, I'm looking at you).

Ultimately, however, I think the POINT of this film is that the most important and loving relationship these boys form is with each other (that might maybe even be a little gay for each other. there, I said it.) Go see it, laugh, laugh laugh laugh and then maybe tear up at the end, like I did. It's sweet and the chicks kind of kick ass and the boys are adorable.

Posted by: redbeaniegirl at August 18, 2007 11:06 AM

First of all, I now have a even greater appreciation for this post: http://feministing.com/archives/006858.html

Responses in order of appearance.

Allen, I will not shut up. Indeed, I have never been a teenage boy, because I have a vagina. Maybe that's why you feel the need to demean me and my perspective.

dave, I am smart. My intelligence and other people's has nothing to do with whether they will see Superbad or not. I'm not an idiot, and I happen to like my soapbox, thank you.

As Margaret displays, not all feminists agree on everything. And that's okay. :)

hoorah, thank you for your support. If you do have a blog, I would like to read it.

MaliceAlice, if you want to "stay home and raise babies and be a housewife," that's fine. That does not mean you are not a feminist. However, coming from someone whose father died when I was four years old, I would suggest you have a plan to support yourself and your future children in case your spouse becomes unable or unwilling to support your lifestyle.

Barbado, thank you for the debate suggestion.

Shannon, thank you for reading my blog. Do you have one of your own that I can read?

Vermillion, thank you for seeing my point. I can see how one could infer that I was calling certain people stupid. I actually meant that they were being insensitive to the perpetuated limited role of women functioning as love interests/sexual partners for the boys and men. Boys and men who almost always are the lead characters with storylines and arcs. I would comment on each of your points, but I have some business to attend to. Overall, my gripe is not in whether or why the girls in the movie are attracted to the boys. My problem is that the girls are barely two dimensional characters, and I'm tired of seeing the exact same tiny role for women, not just in Judd Apatow's movies, but in American cinema in general.

kimmyhula, I'm glad you're a feminist, too. :) I'm not assuming "that because it's a movie about boys, it's automatically misogynistic." There are lots of movies about boys, including one of my favorite movies D2: The Mighty Ducks as an example, that aren't inherently sexist or demeaning to women. I'm getting the misogyny from the Superbad marketing campaign, one that literally focuses on the word "boobs," and offers as a prize a trip to the Playboy mansion. I'm also getting the misogyny from many of the reviews, both the favorable ones and the unfavorable ones.

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at August 18, 2007 11:14 AM

it's a film,people.don't have to get all hyped up and attached to it.we have humans for that.

Posted by: emma at August 18, 2007 11:27 AM

I hope the reason the women in this movie are one-dimensional is that Seth Rogan has never been a woman and doesn't know how to write for them yet. After all, not everyone can be Judd Apatow right out of the gate.

And I think that is where the trouble stems from. The fact of the matter is the movie is written by two guys when they were 13. They basically wrote themselves into a comedy. And other males can relate a lot easier to a movie like this, having been through similar experiences. But because of the limited perspective (and lack of experience in writing), what may seem innocuous to some are glaring to others. I don't think Rogen was intentionally trying to ignore, minimize or demean women; he just wrote what he knew, and he knew how to be a horny teenage boy. He has no real idea how to be a teenage girl, and he never pretended that he did.

I find it more insulting when someone purports to present a point of view they could never have a clue about. Just like those goddamn 'urban' movies I loathe. If he did try to make a more female-centric movie, it would have been disastrous, because he doesn't have the capability of doing so. I have seen where men try to speak for women, and it can be pretty horrendous. That Cameron Diaz gross-out comedy, for example.

So don't knock the guy for doing what came naturally to him. Since he has stated that he reads any reviews he can, chances are good he may pick up on this and try to incorporate it into any future work.

As for American cinema, Bianca, I do feel it is high time for there to be a teen comedy that does show the female perspective more. I mean, I hate to think that the only time you can show realistic teenage girls is in some sort of indie feature or hackneyed drama.

Posted by: Vermillion at August 18, 2007 11:44 AM

How many people would even care about this movie if the advertising campaign hadn't pounded it into their heads so very, very hard?

The funny really isn't enough to justify the way females are portrayed in all of these movies. For some perspective, please think about how many people would think it was perfectly fine to go see a movie treating blacks or Jews or American Indians this way. Somebody would probably called in for a public apology, right? So why is it that when it's women, those who complain just don't have a sense of humor.

Posted by: Meredith at August 18, 2007 11:48 AM

I think everyone needs to calm down a little before we go into the whole "Feminists have no sense of humor. Also, they don't shave their legs!" trope... oops, a little late. Just because one feminist doesn't agree with this sort of humor doesn't mean she's objectively wrong. She doesn't want to see this movie because she doesn't like this trend. She did not kill your cat. Relax.

Also, one feminist's opinion does not represent all of us all the time. There is no feminist hivemind. You aren't about to be assimilated. Calm the hell down.


Of course, I just want to see this movie because I have a huge and inappropriate crush on George Michael Bluth. I mean, Michael Cera.

Posted by: tetetetigi at August 18, 2007 11:51 AM

And AIN'T this the truth:

"The weird hodgepodge of time periods is perhaps the greatest defining characteristic of culture here in the first decade of the new millennium; while the '70s, '80s, and '90s each had their own (often terrible) signposts of individuality, the '00s are all about throwing the past 30 years in a blender and pulling out whatever feels cool at the moment..."

As someone who lived through all of those decades (born in 1970, oh yeah), I find it terribly confusing at times. Disorienting, even. I had a too-long argument with a co-worker at one point who was convinced Napoleon Dynamite was set in the 70s. When I pointed out that his older brother was "online, chatting with babes" all day, that ended the argument, but still....it had both 70s and 80s music, both 70s and 80s clothing, you just never knew what time direction you were facing.

Great review, I actually want to see this.

Posted by: Kathy at August 18, 2007 11:58 AM

I'm gonna just put this out there:

Looking at Seth (physically) I get the impression that homeboy was not exactly a "ladies choice" during his high school years. Maybe, just maybe, his writing is laced(?) with just a touch of passive aggressiveness having to do with that...

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 18, 2007 11:59 AM

Christ, I just wanted to comment on how outstanding the TITLE of this review was, and I have to scroll through a bunch of asshole "serious" opinions on this movie and its motives.

Posted by: johnnyvulture at August 18, 2007 1:12 PM

Bianca doesn't like the premise of this movie. Not only is that a legitimate reason for not going to it, it's also perfectly acceptable for her to post it here.

Ugh, as was already pointed out, no one is preventing her from expressing herself. It is an unfortunate tendency in some folks, however, to criticize films by insinuating that others who enjoy them are socially or politically stunted.

Take a look at the comment sequence and see who threw the first grenade. Bianca's comment was insulting and immature and earned everything it got in response. I generally don't like the "shut the fuck up" comments either, but when one says this:

I still can't understand why seemingly intelligent people will watch this movie, acknowledge that every woman on the screen is portrayed solely as a potential sperm receptacle, then declare the writer of said movie "smart and talented."

. . . one should not be surprised at being told to fuck off.

Posted by: socalledonlycousins at August 18, 2007 1:28 PM

I'm not saying that people should ignore the fact that women don't have depth and etcetera in the movie industry in general, but to start a fight because a movie of quality doesn't fulfill your wildest expectations is a bit extreme. Were not talking about "Captivity" here. Some of the comments are putting it down in a way it doesn't deserve.

Posted by: sol at August 18, 2007 3:34 PM

I don't think this particular movie is really the problem. It sounds like a nostalgic salute to male adolescence. I really don't see anything wrong with omitting three dimensional female characters in this kind of movie. What I think is bringing on some of the negative comments is just exhaustion and frustration with the overwhelming number of these kinds of movies, regardless of their quality, and movies that feature women who don't appear onscreen without men, who have no real personality, who are implausibly attracted to the men onscreen, etc.

Posted by: Piato at August 18, 2007 3:48 PM

I don't think it's Seth Rogen's responsibility to make up for ALL OF HOLLYWOOD's tendencies to portray women far worse than they were treated in this film. If you're looking to criticize films from a feminist perspective, Superbad definitely should not be at the top of the list. At all. As Daniel said, Emma Stone does a great job of seeming as if there's a lot more to her character that's written. I also really liked that both of the girls were brunette.

Evan has high hopes for the party, too, since it's where he plans to make a move on Becca (Martha MacIsaac), the cute girl who keeps flirting with him in math class -- seriously, there's something in the water these girls are drinking.

Given the number of ladies (and maybe some dudes, too) who want to jump Michael Cera's bones, I think whatever Becca's drinking gave her 20/20 vision.

Posted by: Alex at August 18, 2007 5:25 PM

um, i want to see this movie.


i don't know if it's because i'm a teenager who likes girls, or if i shouldn't want to see it since i'm a teenage girl. hell, i don't even know if i'm qualified to be a "real" sort of feminist-- if i'm too blind to my own misogynistic tendencies to count. should that matter to anyone here besides me?


i want to see this movie, where girls are objectified, morals are tacked on, and inappropriate jokes are everywhere. thankyouverymuch.

Posted by: meretyping at August 18, 2007 6:47 PM

The title is a reference to the song that Marge starts to sing at the burlesque house in rebuttal to "We Put The Spring In Springfield," yes?

This movie might be a laugh riot, but I wonder why it is that a large part of me resents this film. Is it because I was one of these guys in high school and am still socially awkward and totally lacking for sex? I should embrace this movie and relate, but am I jealous?

I do know that I get tired of the Hollywood motif of lovable losers and their attempts to snag the hot women. This is yet another example of that. It just seems like such a double standard. Certainly I'm guilty of perpetuating that double standard, but it still bothers me.

Posted by: Rob at August 18, 2007 7:24 PM

Having now read some of the debate above with regard to misogyny, I'd just like to quote Roger Ebert: "It's not what a movie is about, but how it is about it."

It's perfectly acceptable to not be interested in the film based on the premise, but - in spite of my previously stated misgivings - it would only be fair to see the film before decrying it for how it portrays misogyny. We guys do objectify women at times, and we do think about sex. We think about sex a lot. Hence, it's perfecly honest for male characters to behave with those motivations in mind.

When I see things like that recent Entertainment Weekly cover, though, in which its just the two leads awash in the legs and wonderful curves of faceless female, it's easy to leap to conclusions. In essence, the film itself might very well handle the "how" appropriately, but the marketing is very much about the "what."

Posted by: Rob at August 18, 2007 7:37 PM

"perfectly"

"it's"

"females"

I hate typos.

Posted by: Rob at August 18, 2007 7:40 PM

Vermillion, I do agree that Seth Rogen wrote what he knew. I don't think that he was "intentionally trying to ignore, minimize or demean women." However, as with many forms of discrimination, the intention isn't the problem. Additionally, Seth is no longer a teenage boy. Neither is Mr. Apatow. And I do appreciate your acknowledgment for the need for more teen comedies with realistic female perspectives.

Meredith, thank you for your perspective on both the overpromotion of the film, and the reaction when women are treated badly as opposed to other oppressed groups. I would bring up how blacks and Latinos are portrayed in Judd Apatow's films . . . Wait, there aren't any blacks or Latinos in Apatow movies? No Asians either? Oh.

tetetetigi, I like Michael Cera, too! He's supercute.

Barbado, I agree with your observation of where the passive-aggressiveness stems from.

socalled, my comment was neither "insulting" nor "immature." Nor was it a "grenade." When a reviewer states that "MacIsaac has been cast simply because she's 23 and looks good in just a bra and has no qualms about portraying the kind of interchangeable female archetype," my reaction towards the movie is probably not going to be positive. My comment was witty and biting, because this is Pajiba: Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People.

sol, I didn't start a fight. Nor do I expect Superbad or any other movie to fulfill my wildest expectations. Well, High School Musical 2 did last night, but my expectations for that piece of work were low.

Piato, I agree that this movie is part of a larger problem, not the problem in and of itself.

Alex, I don't think it is Seth Rogen's responsibility to make up for anything. However, he doesn't need to perpetuate the problem. He's got money and talent and power in Hollywood. With all that in his hands, he doesn't need to continue portraying women as simply sexual objects. If he doesn't know any real women, he could hire a writer that does to fix that problem.

meretyping, you can be a feminist and still want to see this movie. It's okay. We feminists have a big tent. (Dirty!)

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at August 18, 2007 7:42 PM

(contains minor spoilers)

Honestly, I didn't think the female characters were too far off from girls I knew in high school. The nice, shy girl in math class who has too much to drink and gets in over her head when it comes to sex - I defy anyone to go through secondary school and not meet/be this person. Personally, I did not see her as a "dirty/nice" cliche, seeing as when it comes to sex with Evan, she fumbles, and fumbles badly. She is not the porno star sex kitten hidden in a "nice girl"'s body, she's a regular girl who thinks it's glamorous to get drunk and make out and say dirty things to a boy she likes. The reason the scene was so painfully funny to watch is, being sober, we can see how truly NOT glamorous it is.



As for Jules, I agree that the actress did a fantastic job of portraying her as deeper than the script would suggest. To me, she seems confident and sensible - she has enough self esteem to remain sober and in control while all her friends are drunk, and hold Seth at arms length even though she likes him, which I believe she does.



I don't believe this movie is misogynistic. True, the love interests don't receive much screen time, but that's because the focus is on the teenage boys. True, some skin is shown, but I found that preetty accurate considering that these are teenage girls trying to feel grown up with graduation three weeks away - of course they're going to try and dress sexy. I found the message of the movie very appropriate - you can go to a shitload of trouble to drink and have sex and feel grown up, when in reality, the time the couples seem happiest together is at the end, when they are spending quality, sober time with one another.



I really enjoyed this movie, because it was a pitch-perfect throwback to high school. It's hard not to relate, even with Judah Hill doing flips off of police cars and Michael Cera serenading crackheads. I'd agree with the review - not as funny as Knocked Up, but definitely worth the nostalgia.

Posted by: Gracie at August 18, 2007 8:00 PM

Wait, there aren't any blacks or Latinos in Apatow movies?

Hey, Romany Malco was in Virgin, with as much screentime as Rogen and Rudd. But I get the sentiment.

I am wiped from this whole thing, and I really don't wish for it to get as long as the last Apatow movie review. So, let's let bygones be bygones, live and let live, no harm no foul, and all that jazz. I know I am going to see it, and I respect that some don't want to. And that is all I can do, really.

And the next time, try not to snap at contrary viewpoints like petulant children. They know who I am talking to.

Posted by: Vermillion at August 18, 2007 8:06 PM

I know Chris Mintz-Plasse, and it's nice to see he got not only a good role, but a good review on Pajiba. No higher honor can be given. haha.

Good looking movie. I plan to see it soon.

Posted by: Shaun at August 18, 2007 8:32 PM

Wow, I lose power for two days, and this is what I come back to! No surprise of course, this being Pajiba, that the comments take a turn from talking about the actual film to discussing sociological and ideological issues raised by the film's storyline and characters.

You guys crack my shit up.

My reasons for not seeing this movie are this:

1. After about 20 minutes of juvenile sex and gross-out jokes, I grow weary of this type of humor. "Knocked Up" was hysterical to me because I recently went through the whole pregnancy and birth thing. The pregnancy sex scene was riotously funny because it was SO TRUE.

2. Here goes Bama getting personal: I get weirdly angry at these movies where the geeky/nerd guy lusts after/gets the hot girl. In high school, I was the nerdy girl who hung out with all the nerdy guys. I talked comics, horror movies, Vonnegut with them, had massive crushes on them, and watched them waste their time lusting after those other girls when all along I was right there. The invisible girl friend. Grrrrrrrrr.

Still clinging to that bitterness I suppose is what makes enjoying movies like "Superbad" a little tricky for me.

Therapy anyone?

Posted by: Alabamapink at August 18, 2007 8:42 PM

Wait, there aren't any blacks or Latinos in Apatow movies? No Asians either? Oh.

Not only was Romany Malco in 40YOV, but so was the foul-mouthed Indian guy as well as an Indian guy with a smaller part.

Alex, I don't think it is Seth Rogen's responsibility to make up for anything. However, he doesn't need to perpetuate the problem. He's got money and talent and power in Hollywood. With all that in his hands, he doesn't need to continue portraying women as simply sexual objects. If he doesn't know any real women, he could hire a writer that does to fix that problem.

I can't believe you're making these assumptions without having seen the movie. Ask anyone on here if they thought Jules was a sperm receptacle for Seth. (Spoilers:) Not only was the actress who played her awesome, but in her role as Seth Rogen wrote it, Jonah Hill tries to hook up with her and she refuses to go along with it because he's drunk, and she's not (he had assumed that she was). And then she tells him that she doesn't drink and makes no excuses for it. As a college freshman girl, I cannot emphasize enough how truly rare that is.

Also, Seth Rogen does not have money or power in Hollywood. He's had one leading role and this movie was made before that happened. He probably has no control over how the movie has been marketed. As for Judd Apatow, he does have clout, and he uses it. How could anyone say that Catherine Keener's character in 40-YOV was one-dimensional? Or her daughter?

Like I said, I agree with you that there are major problems with how women are portrayed in Hollywood, but this is not the movie to take it out on. This is a funny-ass movie that treats its women FAR better than its peers did. Wouldn't it be better to focus all this energy on totally eradicating torture porn?

Posted by: Alex at August 18, 2007 9:57 PM

I didn't care for this movie. There were a few joke gems worth holding on to, but generally it wasn't really anything I hadn't heard before. And generally this seemed to be Rogen and Goldberg's fairly masturbatory exercise of filming their 13-year-old fantasies and then expecting us to get off on them too. However, I'm willing to accept that this might just be a matter of differing tastes and leave it at that.


What I will argue, or perhaps more accurately, what baffles me, is the statement that Jonah Hill is portraying a likable person. Seth is funny, but he's a total sociopath, and the movie lets him completely get away with it. Even after Seth admits to Jules that he tried to get her drunk to take advantage of her - and does so unapologetically, more upset simply that his plan failed - she still is willing to entertain the notion of hooking up with him.


I never liked this character, and found myself wondering why Evan or Fogel stuck with him at all, since it seemed to be a fairly thankless relationship. The conclusion I came to was familiarity, and nothing more. The movie seems to take the stance that longtime friends should remain friends for no other reason than that they've known each other for a long time. It's a sentiment I found hard to swallow.

Posted by: Jesse at August 18, 2007 10:15 PM

"My comment was witty and biting..."

"I am smart."

"and I'm pretty funny, if I do say so myself."

People who are genuinely witty, smart, and funny do not usually find it necessary to keep reminding everyone of these traits. Especially when, given the evidence, none of it seems to be true.

Clearly someone has been telling you over and over that you are a unique and beautiful snowflake and that everyone is dying to hear your opinions. And since "this is Pajiba: Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People," allow me to be the first to say: This is simply not true. Discussing unique view points is obviously a good thing; hijacking an entire section as your own personal soapbox is quite the opposite.

Just saying.

Posted by: SuperAwesome! at August 18, 2007 10:35 PM

The movie is about boys point of view, and sadly but true thats how they think of women when they are in that age thankfully some grow out of it, others dont.

Face It!! They spent most of their time thinking os sex, boobs, ass and everything thats related to them getting some, its hormones and thats the funny part bc people can relate bc its happen to them too.

And girls think of the cute, goodlooking, popular boys and not the fat, nerd, smart, sensitive guys.

Thats the reality of the high school and growing up experience!! Deal with It!!

Posted by: NDR at August 19, 2007 1:12 AM

And if you look at movies that are based on the girls (the crapola of the travelling pants, the sweetest crap, etc), you will see that the men are seen in the same way as 1dimensional caracters *I know there just a few of these movies* but come to think of it mens minds, experiences and points of view when growing up are funny as hell bc when we as women see it makes you think of how stupid and silly men are when it comes to getting girls.

And it pains me to say this but to me, movies about girls growing up are always sad, you end up in tears, and sometimes boring.

Posted by: NDR at August 19, 2007 1:26 AM

Well, I'm a tad bitter. This place turns into a full-fledged gangbang and I'm not even in the middle of it -- yet. I can understand Bianca's point in that if you don't like the premise of a movie or find it offensive you can form that opinion without having to see the movie. I also don't think she was calling anyone in particular dumb. With that said, comedy is a different beast than just about any other kind of genre. It really has only one rule: Be Funny. Be funny and fuck the rest. There is not one person on this earth who SHOULDN'T find some part of the Aristocrats joke offensive. But in the context of the joke its (at least to me) funny. Tell me, "Yo momma's so fat..." - whatever. Tell me my Mom is a pig or a bitch and we go to the mattresses. My point is that I don't really care if the female characters were one dimensional if they served their purpose within the framework of making this movie about horny teen boys FUNNY. Reagan, your beef is not with Rogen. He can only be expected to write his story -- he is neither qualified nor obligated to write your funny/witty/smart/biting, I'm sure titivating tale -- and make it funny so it makes it to the big screen. Your beef is with female writers or Hollywood as a whole. It reminds me of a critique I received to an opinion column I wrote long ago. Someone was upset because I only gave my point of view and not the other side's. My response: That's because it was MY POINT OF VIEW. Its not my job to do the other sides work. Lastly, if the male characters only saw the girls as one dimensional shouldn't the movie stay true to that?

Posted by: JP at August 19, 2007 2:08 AM

including one of my favorite movies D2: The Mighty Ducks

Not to get into the Bianca-is-a-bitch/no-she-isn't argument one way or the other, but what the hell.

Posted by: mightygodking at August 19, 2007 3:54 AM

NDR if movies about girls are always sad and boring, that is just more grist to the mill. Can't get to far into this whole thing, it is like Sociology 101. If however, as someone suggested Seth Rogen may read this, one thing I would love to see is more films with some kind of adjustment to or acceptance of the fact that teenage girls are full of hormones and sexual curiousity too. it would be great if this could just be shown in a comedy or a straight film without it being an issue. But I guess Pajiba is based in a country whose legislators are intimidated by Christian fundamentalists. In Australia, legal age of consent for all sexes and preferences is 16, and to drink alcohol is 18. In US is it 18 and 21 respectively? Ridiculous.

Posted by: rosie at August 19, 2007 4:07 AM

......How seriously do you all take yourselves? How badly do you really need to prove your intelligence to people on the internet to have an argument over whether a movie about horny teenage boys treats women with dignity and respect? If anybody takes this or any movie of its genre as some sort of example for living their life and not just a few hours of laughter then they don't deserve to be respected anyway, since they are clearly retarded.

Posted by: soda at August 19, 2007 9:32 AM

awesome! let's rehash 'retarded'

Posted by: rosie at August 19, 2007 10:14 AM

Ah, what has now become known as: "The Retarded Incident"

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 19, 2007 10:17 AM

I'm a longtime reader of Pajiba, but I don't usually get too involved with the comments. However, I have seen this sort of sentiment:

.....How seriously do you all take yourselves? How badly do you really need to prove your intelligence to people on the internet to have an argument over whether a movie about horny teenage boys treats women with dignity and respect? If anybody takes this or any movie of its genre as some sort of example for living their life and not just a few hours of laughter then they don't deserve to be respected anyway, since they are clearly retarded.

pop up a lot whenever discussions start veering toward the socio-political direction. I think it's sort of lame. I know political correctness can get out of hand if it starts stifling creativity, free thought, etc. But what's so wrong about wanting to discuss, in this instance, the portrayal of women in popular culture and what sort of ideas about women, explicit or not, can be taken away from those portrayals?

I mean, after all, this is (motherfucking) Pajiba, where seemingly smart people gather to read about and discuss popular culture. I'm not trying to defend any side in this discussion; rather, I just wanted to say, keep it up with the insightful comments. Reading different people's thoughful perspectives here is awesome, so I wish the "STFU, it's just a movie and nothing more" commenters would try to be a little more open to/respectful of discussions that take turns for the (oh noes!) serious.

Posted by: Loretta at August 19, 2007 12:12 PM

I agree mightygodking......here I was actually reading the thread pondering the debate back and forth, but all of Bianca's credibility went out the window with fucking "Mighty Ducks"!

Posted by: Finn at August 19, 2007 1:06 PM

Not to mention "High School Musical 2"...

Posted by: Pigwidgeon at August 19, 2007 5:33 PM

Jesus.

Only one small comment, then I'm getting the FUCK out of this thread.

People, PLEASE do not throw the word "misogyny" around so casually. It means, by definition, a hatred of women. Not ignorance, not dislike, but actual hatred. It's a word that is terribly overused and misused, and it is far more harsh a term than a movie like this warrants.

So Bianca, while I do disagree with you (which is not unusual), I am certainly not going to say you shouldn't voice your opinion. I think you take these films to seriously, but it usually leads to engaging debate, which is awesome. But I wish you'd choose your words more carefully sometimes. Because you've effectively said that those who like the movie are stupid woman haters, and that, frankly, is ridiculous.

Posted by: TK at August 19, 2007 6:09 PM

Wow. There's more discussion on this film than there was in my Milton class.

Good job pop culture.

Posted by: Tara at August 19, 2007 8:52 PM

TK, as I told meretyping, "you can be a feminist and still want to see this movie. It's okay." I never stated or implied that "those who like the movie are stupid woman haters." If you inferred that, you were mistaken.

Furthermore, despite obvious misunderstandings, I never intended to turn this comment thread into my soapbox. I initially stated my reaction to the review of this movie. Then I got called a humorless feminist and got told to "STFU" and "go away." I never made any personal attacks. Other people made them on me. I then defended myself, my statements and my abilities.

I would truly prefer that people actually discuss the merits of Superbad and why they have or have not chosen to see it, instead of focusing on me.

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at August 19, 2007 9:16 PM

Don't worry Bianca, it's just another example of the vitriol women face when they try to highlight or even mention sexism in popular culture - "STFU", "humorless feminist", etc. etc., we've heard it all before. You didn't sideline this thread, the rude commenters after you actually did that. You also weren't personally insulting anyone, just expressing your views in a passionate way - which were entirely relevant to the review above, which made a very specific point of mentioning the marginal role of women in the film.

Look, I have no problem with focusing on the male perspective, if that's what you know, but why do the women in these movies have to be as interesting as cardboard? Even if they have minor roles, why can't they be funny? You don't have to be a woman to accurately and fairly depict women in a film - they've all got/had sisters, girlfriends, wives, female friends haven't they? Of course, the need for more women filmmakers and movies from a woman's perspective (and I'm not talking Briget Jones here) is another issue.

I love how people say, "this is not the place to talk about this". What? you can't comment on the social/political implications of a film on a movie review site? I will see this, and probably enjoy it, but I will leave feeling a little sad that this is yet another film made by an intelligent filmmaker that totally sidelines women. Oh well. Just would be nice to more often see films where I can actually identify with even one of the characters. I hate to add this postscript, but unfortunately I feel I must - Please don't attack me for expressing my point of view or tell me to shut up. I am not trying to threaten your masculinity in any way - don't worry, the male-centric status-quo will likely be around for a while longer.

TK - "you've effectively said that those who like the movie are stupid woman haters." Seriously, now.

Posted by: Layla at August 19, 2007 10:37 PM

Thanks, Layla! Do you have a blog? I'd click on your name, but it doesn't have a blue link.

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at August 19, 2007 10:51 PM

OMG!!! i can not believe people dont get that this movie is from a teenagers point of view, so if i am a 17teen yrs old boy i am not going to think of women in any other way, and thats the truth.

For boys that are not that popular with girls in high school the real relationships are with their pals and that is what this movie is all about. Two guys that are about to beging their college life apart trying to have their last adventure together, so it has to focus on them. Not the girls, not the parents, not the teachers. Just them!!

So, leave the hatred and save some energy for movies that really deserves it, as i am sure it wont be long before we get captivity 2.

Posted by: NDR at August 19, 2007 11:57 PM

I guess I should just let it go, but I honestly cannot see how people are making sweeping generalizations about the women in this film, because I thought the character of Jules was pretty well-done. Am I missing something here?

Posted by: Alex at August 20, 2007 12:01 AM

Bianca - unless "I still can't understand why seemingly intelligent people will watch this movie" means something completely different than how it sounds, the criticism you've received has been pretty valid. No one is questioning your right to express your opinions, but maybe next time clarify that your beef is with the movie industry in general and refrain from questioning the intelligence of the rest of us. It's especially difficult to accept your criticism of the film when you won't bother to see it. I saw it and laughed my ass off, as did the two women I was with.

Also, this is a little off-topic but why do you keep asking everyone if they have a blog?

Posted by: Johnny at August 20, 2007 12:04 AM

I'm gonna take a stab and say that parents are also one dimensional and underrepresented in this movie so perhaps discussion about them is in order yes?

Posted by: Memorex at August 20, 2007 12:41 AM

"OMG!!! i can not believe people dont get that this movie is from a teenagers point of view, so if i am a 17teen yrs old boy i am not going to think of women in any other way, and thats the truth."

I think the big problem with the movie is NOT that fact, but rather the attitude the film and it's creators (who're *not* 17 year old boys) /take/ *towards* the subject matter and perspective.

Posted by: fuggle at August 20, 2007 12:56 AM

"OMG!!! i can not believe people dont get that this movie is from a teenagers point of view, so if i am a 17teen yrs old boy i am not going to think of women in any other way, and thats the truth."

I think the big problem with the movie is NOT that fact, but rather the attitude the film and it's creators (who're *not* 17 year old boys) /take/ *towards* the subject matter and perspective.

- - - - - -

"Bianca - unless "I still can't understand why seemingly intelligent people will watch this movie" means something completely different than how it sounds, the criticism you've received has been pretty valid."

How it sounds to me is "I don't understand why this doesn't appall other intelligent people the way it does me". It in no way impugns the intelligence of people who enjoys it, it merely expresses disbelief at how they do when it seems, to her, that they shouldn't.

That's how it reads to me, at least.

Posted by: fuggle at August 20, 2007 1:05 AM

wow, i've been working too hard, so i've missed this. my question is:

after the "mighty ducks" quip, does anyone else think bianca might be a troll, in the raoul xemblinosky mode?

Posted by: rocky at August 20, 2007 9:02 AM

My understanding of what Bianca wrote was that it's disheartening to see intelligent and otherwise critical people embrace a movie without taking into account some pretty obvious gender stuff. I think that's entirely valid.

I believe Rob referred to this movie and its ilk as the "lovable loser" genre. I think that's a very apt description. I'm trying to think of female analogues to the male "lovable loser" film where a female who is unattractive/dorky gets the guy and am having trouble. "Muriel's Wedding", perhaps (meaning that Toni Collette is cast as unattractive/dorky, even though she's really not)? There may be a few, but they're most certainly outnumbered by male versions.

Posted by: Samantha T at August 20, 2007 9:19 AM

"....My understanding of what Bianca wrote was that it's disheartening to see intelligent and otherwise critical people embrace a movie without taking into account some pretty obvious gender stuff. I think that's entirely valid...."

**************************************************

That sounds about right to me. As for female lovable loser type films, I would propose that first *big* Minnie Driver flick, you know, before we found out she was a raging cunt, had "circle" or some shit like that on the title.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 20, 2007 9:27 AM

Maybe I misunderstood.

1. Bianca, you have to see why your initial statement, the one that got people riled up, can be easily misconstrued...

I still can't understand why seemingly intelligent people will watch this movie

Some people will read that as "people who see this are not intelligent". Whether or not it was your intent, at least admit that the word choice led to the misunderstanding.

Misogyny (definition): hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.

Some people will read that by using that term, if you feel you're using it correctly (which is why I mentioned it previously), you're saying that they match their definition.

Ergo, stupid woman hater. It's not hard to draw the conclusion. But since you obviously refuse to back down - not from your beliefs! - but from your word usage, you'll have to accept that it pissed people off. It's unfortunate that, despite the words you chose, you think it's MY mistake, and not that you perhaps could have chosen your words more carefully.

It's also unfortunate because I think you have a valid point, but your language was so inflammatory that it not only derailed the debate and insulted the readers, but it brought the crazies out of the woodwork.

Posted by: TK at August 20, 2007 9:54 AM

I have to say, the dick drawings were the greatest things I have ever seen on the silver screen.

Posted by: Melina at August 20, 2007 10:01 AM

Coming in very late to this string of comments, but honestly, saw nothing wrong with the way the girls in this film were portrayed. Jules was adorable, smart, and ridiculously self confident. She has a party with her friends that are completely focused on drinking, and tells the guy that she likes, who is drunk and obviously enjoys drinking, that she hasn't had a drink, and doesn't drink at all. She doesn't giggle and go along with him, or make excuses about why she didn't drink that night.

michael cera doesn't let anyone talk bad about becca, he stands up to his best friend when he feels he is being disrespectful. He wants to be her boyfriend, not bang her one night. And becca isn't suddenly the "hot girl"; her dancing is uncomfortable because of how dorky she still is.

I find the humor to be intelligent. Sure there's some vulgar lines, but it's not gross out humor.

Posted by: Erin at August 20, 2007 10:50 AM

TK, don't blame me for bringing "crazies out of the woodwork." I didn't derail any debate. I got attacked, and I defended myself. I have disagreed strongly with other people's viewpoints at many times in my life. But I have never told anyone to "shut the fuck up." People chose to be mean to me. I never asked them to.

Also, being accused of misogyny is not as bad as being the victim of it. I never accused you or anyone on this thread of being misogynistic. However, I have now been the victim of misogyny on this very thread. Ironic.

Seriously, talk about Superbad now.

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at August 20, 2007 11:00 AM

Wow, way to rip on Bianca without reading what she wrote.
I still can't understand why seemingly intelligent people will watch this movie, acknowledge that every woman on the screen is portrayed solely as a potential sperm receptacle, then declare the writer of said movie "smart and talented
She is obviously referring to the reviewer who:
1. Is seemingly intellegent
2. watched the movie
3. acknowledged that every woman on the screen yada, yada
4. declared the writer smart and talented.
Of course, this gives the He-Man woman haters a right to demand she leaves the site. Learn to Read People!!!!

Posted by: ShannonAnn at August 20, 2007 11:04 AM

Alright, dammit, in all of this discussion of misogyny and the equal rights of all opinions on a comment board, we are forgetting the truly important thing...

McLovin.


For fucking real. Michael Cera is adorable, and Jonah Hill is hilarious. But McLovin was pure genius.

Posted by: MG at August 20, 2007 11:38 AM

I think this can officially be referred to as: "the Misogyny episode"

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 20, 2007 11:49 AM

Lovable loser movies about girls! Yay! Going all old school there's Funny Girl with Babs and going all new school there's Hairspray the movie, Hairspray the musical, and Hairspray the movie musical. Sandwiched in there is lots of succulent loser girl goodness. Obvious: My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Less obvious: Real Genius is all about crazy "I could knit you a sweater; I never sleep" Jordan in my opinion and she ends up with the young hero. I should note that it's been a long, long time since I've seen the first and I only saw the original Hairspray when it was in theaters so I may be misremembering parts. But I will happily challenge anyone to a Real Genius quote-off. Chris Knight: "I passed but I failed! Yeah!" Laslo: "Then I'm happy and sad for you."

Posted by: just me at August 20, 2007 11:59 AM

Oh. I seem to have careened crazily off topic. Kent: "You'll rue the day!" Sorry, Kent. Sorry, everybody.

Posted by: just me at August 20, 2007 12:02 PM

OMG! I laughed until I cried. Like eversanderson, I am in my late 40's and went with my 17 year old daughter. It's a movie about teens, but extremely well done with actors that have incredible comedic timing. I also laughed in places where the rest of the theatre did not. But that's because I have more life experience. Also loved the cops who drank and broke the law by running red lights with their sirens on. Gee, ever seen this in real life??? McLovin and the big kid were awesome!

also loved the 70's funk!

Posted by: Mike at August 20, 2007 12:27 PM

Bridget Jones. I'm just saying. And, unlike, My Big Fat Greek Wedding and She's All That, etc. Bridget doesn't go through some miraculous make-over transformation to get the dude.

Posted by: redbeaniegirl at August 20, 2007 12:49 PM

SIGH

Bianca, as much as you'd like to believe it, that's not true. You haven't been the victim of misogyny here. Why? Because, while it's true that there are readers here who are perhaps pissed off, I doubt they hate you. And if they do, it's not because you're a woman, it's because they simply don't like you. Again, I truly, honestly don't think you understand what misogyny actually is.

But you're determined to cast yourself in the victim's role, regardless of words or intent. And frankly, I'm tired of it, so I'm out of here.

Posted by: TK at August 20, 2007 12:56 PM

The movie was hillarious, however, as far as the "girl" characters go, I don't even know how poster "Erin" remembered the girls names as they were completely insignificant, and empty as characters....in fact all they seemed to be in my eyes were schoolgirl fantasy "real dolls", which is how I imagine Apatow and Rogan see women themselves.

Women are rarely allowed into men's world of comedy, unless they are there to play empty hollow characters with no substance and are hot. Once and a while they are allowed to fall down, or get hit in the face accidentally, which is funny for some people I guess....if women getting hurt is funny.

I laughed so hard I almost had a seizure watching this movie, but Bianca is right...100%, it is a misogynistic, creepy look into Rogan and Apatow's damaged views of women (pornography?). I still went, I don't believe in not seeing things that might offend you. How the hell do you really know what you are arguing about if you have not examined the topic yourself.

Posted by: mizzfortunate at August 20, 2007 1:55 PM

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but can we please stop throwing around the misused term "misogyny"? These teenage kids are not misogynistic. Watch In the Company of Men if you would like to see a lead male character with a misogynistic streak.

The lead males in this film may objectify women, but it's not out of hatred that they do so. They're oversexed, hormonal little beasties that don't have many female friends (read: no girlfriends, no sex) and are completely ignorant to the mystery of women. Drawing a face on their hand and watching porn is probably the closest they get to interaction with a girl in the flesh. It's ignorance, not hatred that drives character interaction in this film. And the writers and directors of this film have done a respectable job in capturing the sexually frustrated, awkward, blind puppy lust that accompanies adolescence for these young men.

Posted by: Erica O. at August 20, 2007 2:25 PM

coolest f word ever deserves a fuckin' shout!

Posted by: katy cook at August 20, 2007 2:57 PM

I have been waiting to see this movie for MONTHS, and finally had the chance to go last night, with three of my girlfriends, and we laughed harder than 95% of the almost all-male theatre.
The boys are 17. They are crass and crude. When my girlfriends and I get together, we are hardly any better.
And as a totally commited, gung-ho 18-year-old feminist, all I can say is: take it with a grain of salt.

Posted by: layla at August 20, 2007 3:02 PM

Oh, and do you really think that if the movie was from the point of view of two high school girls, the male characters would be entirely fleshed out? No, they would be objects of obsession and sexual fantasy too.

This is not award-winning art-house film. It's Superbad.

Posted by: layla at August 20, 2007 3:09 PM

It's easy to say "it's just a movie", a weak way to discredit an argument in my opinon. It's just a movie that is guaranteed to be seen by millions of young men and women. Movies and television have heavy influence over society. With that point there is a real argument here. Anyone care to debate that point?

Posted by: mizzfortunate at August 20, 2007 3:19 PM

Yeah only intelligent people like the Mighty Ducks!!!

Bianca- The wonderful thing about feminism is CHOICE- for women to do WHATEVER they damn well want- see a movie, not see a movie, "stay home and raise babies", not stay home and raise babies- and unless you're speaking out against such blatant violence against women movies (Captivity, anyone?) I think your argument is pretty weak. Sorry.

-A female feminist WITH a sense of humor who does NOT intend on seeing said movie (I think it just looks kinda stupid, has absolutely nothing to do with feminism, I promise)

Posted by: Be Adequite! at August 20, 2007 4:34 PM

I cannot understand how seemingly intelligent people can go on ad infinitum about this topic. Oh damn, now I done pissed everyone off. But seriously, Bianca does not deserve such vituperation.

Posted by: JP at August 20, 2007 4:41 PM

Bianca - Never Been Kissed and 10 Things I Hate About You? Your reservations about Superbad sound like a ringing endorsement.

Posted by: Sosumi at August 20, 2007 4:48 PM

JK, I feel the same way when seemingly intelligent people ask why seemingly intelligent people are debating a topic that is obviously important to them and not you.

Posted by: mizzfortunate at August 20, 2007 5:01 PM

johnny you're very perceptive. bianca keeps asking everyone if they have a blog because she has a blog, and i suspect most of her argument here is an attempt to drive traffic to her own site.

Posted by: rocky at August 20, 2007 5:33 PM

Gave up reading comments halfway down the scroll, but I just wanted to point out that unlike most teen comedies the losers don't actually get inexplicably laid (a la American Pie) by the end of the movie (aside from McLovin). They don't even get past second base, unless the definition has been broadened to buying cover-up/comforters.

Posted by: gravyboat at August 20, 2007 7:33 PM

Some people will read that as "people who see this are not intelligent".

If people don't have the basic reading comprehension skills to understand that she was speaking to the writer of the sentence she quoted and in fact calling that person intelligent and/or understand that when she said "misogynistic films," she was referring to films and not people, then perhaps they *aren't* intelligent.

Posted by: Allison at August 20, 2007 8:35 PM

bit late, now, when i said i wasn't sure if i was a "real" feminist, i didn't mean it had anything to do with seeing the goddamned movie. which was good, by the way. even kind of sweet. and count me in on the michael cera-liking.


so there!

Posted by: meretyping at August 20, 2007 9:41 PM

TK, if you're going to insult a perfectly legitimate argument of bianca's (that male-centric personnas like this one are flat-out insulting and should be obselete by now), at least use your fucking grammar correctly: "i think you take these films to seriously" should be "too" and not "to"...and if you're trying to insult others on this site, at least try not to sound too stupid while you're doing it next time, eh?

Posted by: JMB at August 20, 2007 11:48 PM

In my opinion, comedy has a lot to do with laughing at the misfortune of others. Depending on how compassionate or self-righteous we are, we laugh at their defects (mentally and physically) and their circumstances (self-inflicted or no). It's cruel, but it's true.

What I thought was funny about "Superbad" was:

The main characters, Seth, Evan and Fogel, were operating under a ridiculous, yet common, belief that they HAD to get laid, no matter what the cost. 24/7, it seems that's what they thought about. Yes, it can be inappropriate to be obsessed with sex to the point that you don't give a shit about the other person, that you just care about your own needs, but in the context of the film, it's funny, because I was thinking: "Dudes, calm down. It will happen when it happens. If you get this worked up over sex, you're just going to scare everybody off."

Yes, I was privately counseling fictional characters, but I hope you see my point.

Plus, the audience is almost a "fourth wheel," a silent character. Not a frame goes by (that I can think of) in which Seth, Evan or Fogel isn't in the scene. I think the idea is to kind of let the audience tag along on one more dumb high school adventure with these guys and if the filmmakers took the time to develop the female roles, or did anything else that took time away from the trio, then the illusion would be lost.

While you're watching the movie, you're hanging out with the guys, in all their pathetic, adolescent glory.

And finally, the cops are so irresponsible, it's hilarious. You don't want them to answer any of your calls to 911 in real life, but in the film, they are awesome.

Posted by: Robert Sims at August 21, 2007 12:25 AM

Jesus... Titty-fucking... Christ...

I almost got sucked in....I just spent like 10 minutes typing, but then realized that everyone who is arguing right now on this fucking thread is trying to prove who is the smartest fucking moron.

Why didn't they show how cool the guys could be in the 'Bratz' movie. FUCKING SEXIST BITCHES those girls were. I wanna know more about the awkward kid in the AV club who can't talk to the Bratz to say hello cuz he ends up with a boner before the 2nd syllable leaves his mouth.

Posted by: PissBoy at August 21, 2007 9:34 AM

JMB, if you're going to insult someone's spelling, learn to spell "persona".

Posted by: I Love Beets at August 21, 2007 9:42 AM

I wish we could all get along like we used to in middle school... I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy...
[about to cry]

Posted by: smash at August 21, 2007 11:29 AM

I can jump off the high-dive!

Posted by: PissBoy at August 21, 2007 1:12 PM

So much for my 'August Strindberg Loveline Confessions' movie. Ah, well.

Posted by: M at August 21, 2007 1:38 PM

The weird hodgepodge of time periods is perhaps the greatest defining characteristic of culture here in the first decade of the new millennium; while the '70s, '80s, and '90s each had their own (often terrible) signposts of individuality, the '00s are all about throwing the past 30 years in a blender and pulling out whatever feels cool at the moment

Posted by: SParker at August 21, 2007 2:19 PM

The weird hodgepodge of time periods is perhaps the greatest defining characteristic of culture here in the first decade of the new millennium; while the '70s, '80s, and '90s each had their own (often terrible) signposts of individuality, the '00s are all about throwing the past 30 years in a blender and pulling out whatever feels cool at the moment

Posted by: SParker at August 21, 2007 2:21 PM

I'm sensitive to gender issues as is my boyfriend. If that makes us feminists, whatever. But the truth is this movie doesn't make men look any better. The male characters in this movie are shallow, ugly, sex-crazed perverts who thankfully have one tiny shred of morality which is basically their only redeeming quality. Movies like this should be seen as equally offensive for men and women. They make PEOPLE look bad, not necessarily one gender over the other. I don't mind seeing these movies because they make everyone stupid by playing up on erroneous gender stereotypes. Take it with a grain of salt and laugh a little and be grateful that most men and women you know are not actually like that.

Posted by: Starbuck at August 21, 2007 2:55 PM

WOW. i saw this movie, rather enjoyed it, and thought that the gender roles were one of the more interesting parts of it!


i think this is very much a "male" movie, and you can take that however you want. but i think its about growing up as a male, dealing with societal pressure on young men, and the conjunction of growin up and learning about "being a man."


as for the little screen time for the ladies, and that they are symbols or archtypes, that is exactly the point and their purpose. they serve, in the narrative of this movie, as symbols for the male characters to idealize. the movie twists this a little though, as the quiet girl becomes basically a sexual predator, and the girl you thought was a party girl wants to take it slow. so i think while the girls were under developed in character, they were at least given some stereotypes to play around with. i think a main point of the movie is that society has told these boys that they are supposed to act in a certain way (ie. be a provider (of booze!), be confident, maintain generalized assumptions of their and women's roles) and then finally realize that the societal norms and ideals of gender roles do not always apply and can limit your own experience.


as a side note, i cannot think of anything more frustrating than someone who claims to be a feminist judging a book by its cover. what a miserable display.

Posted by: shaine at August 21, 2007 3:19 PM

I can't believe how much time I wasted just reading through one quarter of this chain of comments. Maybe a next week's comment diversion should be for "Movies That Made Me a Misogynist".

Dear Lord. . .

Posted by: prairiegirl at August 21, 2007 5:22 PM

prairiegirl, i think i love you.

Posted by: sosumi at August 21, 2007 5:54 PM

So what are you so afraid of?

Posted by: bartap at August 22, 2007 2:35 AM

Prairiegirl, you are right you did waste your time, and you wasted my time with your generic, holier than thou opinion. If you don't like an argument, or have nothing to contribute, why bother posting at all?

Posted by: mizzfortunate at August 22, 2007 10:29 AM

mizzfortunate, please read what you posted, and apply it to how you feel about prairiegirl's post. "Holier than thou"? Nope, sorry. She knows how to take a step back and bring in a little bit of humor. At least be fair and practice what you preach ("If you don't like an argument...why bother posting at all?").

Posted by: raevan at August 22, 2007 1:07 PM

I'm very late to this thread, though I have been following it since the beginning. I very much doubt anyone will see this, but in case Bianca Reagan does come back, I'd just like to add this: Yes, Bianca. You have the freedom to say whatever you want, and the nice people at Pajiba allow you that. You also have every right to raise certain issues. But you basically hijacked this thread and took all the attention away from what was actually a very good review. If you want to focus all the attention on yourself, do it on your blog, please. Don't be so self-important to think that the majority of the readers on this site care what you have to think.

Posted by: Great Mango at August 22, 2007 5:08 PM

Great Mango,of course Bianca will come back. I didnt count her posts, but there were at least 5... Think how much time she's already dedicated trying to "defend" herself, or in other words making vain attempts to win arguments on the internets, with people she doesnt know, will never meet and who's opinions about movies do not hurt her(or womankind as a whole, for that matter)

Anyway, to sum it up, i dont think she's awfully skilled at "rising above", or "getting the fuck over it"

Posted by: Carrie at August 23, 2007 10:04 PM

I would love to see a comedy with girl characters similar to the Cera and Hill characters. Hilarious, dorky, not-that-attractive, weirdly obsessed with the opposite sex, and still trying to figure out who they are. No "movie makeover."

Someone should write one.

That's what frustrates me about movies like this. I completely understand that teenage boys think like that, and I thought the movie was hilarious. But, boys, place yourself in a girl's shoes for a moment. These movies tell you that you're worthless--even to more "realistic" guys like Hill--unless you're attractive.

Posted by: Manda at August 25, 2007 11:28 AM

Excellent idea, Manda! I nominate Tina Fey to be that someone.

Teenage boys are very foreign to me as I am female and old and childless. But I do love a good sight gag, so off I go to the cineplex.
(Judd Apatow attended the same high school as me, so I feel obligated to see this movie.)
Perhaps Bianca should stick to commenting on movies she's actually seen. Merely a suggestion.

Posted by: Fabiola Thing at August 27, 2007 9:02 PM

Saw this recently and was inspired to write about it myself. I am now comfortable aging, forgot what a loser I was in High School.

Posted by: Fairmaiden327 at August 28, 2007 11:52 AM

I am McLovin..which happeneds to be my favorite new quotes..This fuckin movie was fucking funnny..It made me feel like a fucking honry little school boi the lives of these kids was fucking pathetic and you couln't help but laugh at there stupidty and navity. Because of this movies constant use of the word fucking I can't help keep saying fuck. but the movie was fucking funny it was. A lot of the humor was so embrassing you couldn't help but laugh..It was kind of pitiful. At first I wasn't sure if I ws going to like it but io did and as you can see by the numerous blogs everyone would have to agree the movie was fucking awseome..and that I am McLovin..lol

Posted by: lissaturtle at August 28, 2007 11:54 AM

I am McLovin..which happeneds to be my favorite new quotes..This fuckin movie was fucking funnny..It made me feel like a fucking honry little school boi the lives of these kids was fucking pathetic and you couln't help but laugh at there stupidty and navity. Because of this movies constant use of the word fucking I can't help keep saying fuck. but the movie was fucking funny it was. A lot of the humor was so embrassing you couldn't help but laugh..It was kind of pitiful. At first I wasn't sure if I ws going to like it but io did and as you can see by the numerous blogs everyone would have to agree the movie was fucking awseome..and that I am McLovin..lol

Posted by: lissaturtle at August 28, 2007 11:56 AM

I'm going to tell myself that the Lisa Turle post(s) above are a bit of brilliant satire, rather than a genuine semi-literate rant. That's what I'm going to tell myself.

Posted by: bartap at August 28, 2007 3:08 PM

I got to maybe halfway through the comments until Bianca climbed onto a bigger cross and cried that she was a victim of misogyny on an Internet message board. So here's my .02:

The movie was okay. McLovin is going to go the way of "Girls like guys with great skills!" and whatever Napoleon Dynamite quip plagued us for the last few years. Cera and Hill are reported to have great chemistry together, but I didn't see it. So many cuss words that it made my head hurt. The girls were the typical "Which was which?" in a comedy with boys as the central characters. Jules and Becca were never seen together the entire movie, and suddenly, were going to the mall together. If I had puked on someone's comforter, I would've bought a new one, left it on their doorstep, rang the doorbell, and ran.

Also, someone said something about being the nerdy girl hanging with the nerdy boys while they lusted after the hot girls. HELL YEAH. Let's get a movie about THAT. Expect a few movies, though, with the main girls being morbidly obese, with Coke bottle glasses, that gigantic braces headset, or some other affliction, because nerdy girls CANNOT, at all, be decently attractive. They're either horribly ugly or over-the-top hot. I wish you could stick Hollywood in a real high school where popular girls are actually very ugly with their easy-bake tans and platinum blonde hair reserved only for women in their 70s, while the "band geeks" and such are actually pretty demure and spot-on.

Posted by: duckandcover at August 28, 2007 3:49 PM

that's not richard pryor on jonah hill's tee shirt, it's fred armisen, of snl fame. look closer at the production stills.

Posted by: Jim at August 30, 2007 6:03 AM

I think a lot of you are missing the whole teenage boy perspective here.

Granted, I'm a woman and of course didn't have the experience myself, I am fortunate to have had a great number of male friends in high school and one as my best friend since middle school. Needless to say, I've seen the progression of maturity in the male form- from begging Britney Spears to hit them "one more time" to "HOLY CRAP BRITNEY KISSED MADONNA!" to "Man, she's packed on a few and I'm not sure if I'd want to get anywhere near something that has had Kevin Federline inside it but...maybe" to "You know, Britney Spears is a really fugly slut and my penis literally goes inward when I see pictures of her".

Some (I will say some because not all men are this way as I'm sure it will be argued) young guys see women as more of hot pieces of @$$ rather than actual people. I mean, you've all heard guys gathered around talking about "that hot chick from biology" and how she didn't wear panties yesterday...and yet they don't even feel the need to mention her name or anything about her other than her underwear choices.

All I'm saying is the view of women from a male high school perspective is more like a meat market than an actual, developed (emotional and mental) relationship. Teenage boys could know everything from who she's slept with, her bra size, favorite flavor of lube, etc etc but not know the slightest thing about who she REALLY is as a person. At that point they simply do not care (yet). That is what I think this movie shows...the lack of personal interest vs. sexual interest that happens during the high school years.

Idk if any of that made sense but I LOVE THIS MOVIE!! Yes, a 22 year old woman loves this movie. Then again, I'd rather drink a beer and watch Superbad with a room of smelly guys than The Nanny Diaries any freakin' day of the week so I'm not sure if my opinion matters. There just isn't enough booze to help me through watching that sort of boring chick-lit crapola.

Can't wait until it hits DVD! I'll bet the outtakes are fantastic.

Posted by: Amber at August 31, 2007 1:33 AM

I wish there were more movies that showed awkwardness, in real life you want to die yourself, but awkwardness for someone else - GENIUS

Posted by: Sam at September 5, 2007 2:37 AM

I saw the movie superbad. I laughed at McLovin. I cringed at the way the Seth character spoke about women. It reminded me of high school. I was smart and shy. The popular guys ignored me and the nerdy guys made frequent mean, often sexual comments about myself and the other girls. It made them feel better about themselves to demean us. It sucked. It still sucks. It made me a feminist. I liked it when the Seth character was hit by a car twice and I liked it that the characters homosexual desire for each other was made apparent. So all those negative comments Seth about Becca made sense. First she revealed his preference for dicks in elementary school then she stole his boyfriend.

Posted by: agualinda at September 12, 2007 2:10 AM

This movie is soo funny..But its totally false, kids do not have sex in highschool...

Posted by: Molly at October 20, 2007 9:49 PM

I haven't watched this movie, but I have been told by more than one person IRL that I remind them of Seth Rogan.

Posted by: Raoul Xemblinosky at November 21, 2007 5:51 PM

When I first saw the trailer for this, my initial reaction was, "Hell to the motherfucking NO," because I did not like Knocked Up, and I know wayyy too many teenage boys to want to pay $10 to see their ridiculous shenanigans writ large at my local multiplex.

But then I watched all three seasons of Arrested Development in like four days, and lo, like a beautiful and slightly inappropriate flower, my love for Michael Cera blossomed. Since Juno is still making its tantalizingly slow way out to Western MA, I decided to see Superbad, God help me. And this is what happened:

I kinda liked it, but I'm not happy about it. I'm pretty sure that's heavily influenced by the fact that almost all of the parts of the movie that DON'T feature Michael Cera being incredibly adorable DO feature Seth Rogen in a 70's handlebar moustache, which COME ON, how awesome is that? On the other hand, although Jonah Hill's character has some good moments (especially his scenes with Emma Stone, who has the sexiest voice EVER, and gorgeous snapping blue eyes and some definite sass), I couldn't ignore that he seemed to be basically a completely terrible person. Like, his only redeeming qualities were the fact that he knew how incredibly kickin' Jude was and how much he loved his best friend, sometimes, unless he was in a bad mood, which doesn't exactly make me sympathetic to his no-ass-gettin' plight, you know? (Besides, he said he was getting handjobs in the 10th grade? This kid is doing all right, he doesn't need my pity.)

Which brings me to my major issue: the ass-gettin'. The idea that a girl who looks like Emma Stone would want to get with a guy who looks like Jonah Hill is totally plausible. Really, I'm not being sarcastic, but here's the thing: he would have to be a sweetheart -- fun, funny, kind, respectful, intelligent. And he is none of those things. (Well, maybe funny, in a Jackass sort of way.) It just strains credulity that she would see ANYTHING at all worthwhile in him, any reason to get to know him better, physically or otherwise. And conversely, in the "sex" scene between Michael Cera and Martha McIsaac, it is suggested that he really likes her "as a person" so to speak, and she's really only interested in the physical side of things. Now, granted, I think Michael Cera is rather attractive, and she is EXTREMELY drunk, but the idea that this girl would only want him for his body is totally ludicrous, and I sort of resent how shallow the writers have her turn out to be. She's his dream girl; he respects her, and yet she never once shows any qualities worthy of his respect.

I feel like if the writers had unclenched their death-grip on teen movie stereotypes, JUST enough to make Jonah Hill's and Martha McIsaac's characters decent, actual people (albeit people with different personalities and motivations than their counterparts), this would have been a much better (and much less controversy-inispiring -- phew, yes, I read the WHOLE THREAD) film.

Not that, you know, anyone will ever read this, or anything.

Posted by: Smithy at December 12, 2007 9:51 PM

I watched twenty minutes of this film and truly despised it. I felt greatly empowered in my choice to not continue watching it. Power of choice for a woman is true feminism.

Posted by: Gloria at December 26, 2007 5:24 PM

I watched twenty minutes of this film and truly despised it. I felt greatly empowered in my choice to not continue watching it. Power of choice for a woman is true feminism.

Posted by: Gloria at December 26, 2007 5:25 PM

You know what? Bianca has the right to say anything she wants, but it doesn't change the fact that bottom line she's just kind of annoying.

Posted by: lisa p at January 1, 2008 12:06 PM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time