"Bridesmaids" and the Failure of Gender Roles

Discussion in 'Overtime: Off-Topic Discussion' started by teacozy, May 17, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. teacozy

    teacozy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    10,740

    Here's the thing, off the bat. You can debate whether gender norms/how the sexes stereotypically behave is innate or learned but I dunno if you can debate that people's lazy embodiment of this sort of thing isn't disappointing and often boring.

    Basically, the lead-up to this movie was that it's level of success would dictate whether or not a Hollywood already pathetically bereft of any ideas or foresight would gamble and take a loss on other by-women for-women films. Judd Apatow and Paul Feig, from "Freaks and Geeks" and about 5 or 6 meh ("Funny People") to amazing ("Forgetting Sarah Marshall", "Knocked Up", "Superbad") Apatow comedies since 2005 were behind it, it featured no less than three Saturday Night Live writers/comedians in the cast, the blond from "Reno 911", etc, etc.

    So it's Tuesday. The receipts are in and so are the blog pieces debating whether it succeeded or not. Jezebel predictably called it a success while others weren't so gung-ho and personally invested in what could be viewed as a very efficient version of one of the worst types of movies Hollywood produces.

    What does this mean, though? The bias from both sides of the debate are obvious but as someone who kind of hates when identity politics/standpoint trumps actual progression and quality, I kind of demand the same thing from women as I do men. I like meeting people who are PEOPLE and not gendered cliches of day-time Yoplait ads and post-Metallica dickheads with UFC hats.

    Am I alone on thinking people should be more than their sex or is this just how shit is? And would it be better for female movie-makers to tiptoe into Hollywood like this or to be more uncompromising? Why can't everything be like "Mean Girls"?
    test
  2. Eyerate

    Eyerate The Definition of Real..

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    11,927
    i really dont understand your argument.. it looks like a jerkoff comedy akin to every apatow flick thats come out in recent memory. its the female version of the hangover. noone is seriously critiquing this film are they? drawing all sorts of social commentary from its reception? because that would be really dumb.
    test
  3. Bleach...

    Bleach... Put me in your markers...

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,165
    I think movies should be movies and be better than this.
    test
  4. fluentnigganese

    fluentnigganese New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    391
    Didn't read it.
    test
  5. teacozy

    teacozy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    10,740
    that's because my argument is really terrible and slapped onto the end just to see if anyone discusses it. lmao.

    but yeah, there's seriously a debate/critique happening in the media/blogs about this whole thing.
    test
  6. RegularJoe

    RegularJoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Messages:
    2,465
    I don't have anything to contribute to this thread, except to say that ...

    A) After seeing the trailer for this, I told a female friend of mine that I didn't think it looked very funny. She responded by saying that if it was a movie about a bunch of guys, I would want to see it. I was unsure if she was correct or not.

    B) Mean Girls was the shit, and was shot at my old neighborhood high school. Etobicoke Collegiate Institute STAND UP! Fuck Lohan was mint in that movie. On some ...

    [youtube]7Dw7GE_BYjI[/youtube]

    ... shit, nah'mean?
    test
  7. teacozy

    teacozy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    10,740
    Why Bridesmaids won?t save the ?chick flick? (and shouldn?t have to) | Film | For Our Consideration | The A.V. Club

    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)