Letters to the Editor
-
candypants, Re: Leslie Howard
I may be a grandfather, but now I feel better about it. I hadn't the faintest idea who Leslie Howard was.
BTW, consider: Ric Ocasek + Petra Nemcova, John Mayer + Jessica Simpson, and the quintessential match, Lyle Lovett + Julia Roberts.
How can the Knocked Up premise be discounted?
-
I'm not discounting the premise. After all, it's a movie BUT....
one of these things doesn't belong with the others.
Ric Ocasek + Paulina Porzikova
Famous rock star and famous hot model
John Mayer + Jessica Simpson
Currently famous recording artist and famous hot celebrity (music, acting)
Lyle Lovett + Julia Roberts.
Famous country music star and noted actor and very famous actress
Judd Apatow and Leslie Mann
Sucessful movie and TV director and sucessful actress
"Knocked Up" couple
Hot young career woman and directionless stoner schlub
Again, I'm not knocking the movie's premise and such couples do occasionally exist in real life, but, the real life comparisons being offered here don't work.
-
The Mother has the Power, yet Fatherhood is Elevated
I think there is a sub-text to the movie and therein lies the abortion option. The sub-text: she doesn't need him. This is a modern, educated, wealthy young woman and she's holding all the cards. Seth's character is utterly without power in this film during the pregnancy. It's the polar opposite of what an old movie about an unplanned preganancy would have been. Yet, paradoxically, fatherhood is elevated. As the pregnancy moves forward and their relationship grows and then chills, you know that he is going to father that baby, with her or separately from her. There is no walking away by the father, and there is no single mother coldly deciding the father is irrelevant.
This is the kind of movie I think fundamentalist religious freaks could see, and then just maybe they would start to get an inkling of why feminism and independent thinking and even a little sleaziness really brings some good into the world.
-
Correction...
>Well, many women feel that their immature, somewhat irresponsible lovers and potential mates will do a sudden 180 when faced with the prospect of childbirth and rearing a family.<
Women with sense (those for whom wedding fantasies were a childhood stage and not an overriding goal, for example) don't, thank you.
-
For decades, popular entertainment has refused to acknowledge that something like 1 in 4 pregnancies in this country ends in abortion.
"Spontaneous abortion" aka miscarriage is included in your stats.
If you are ready for a heartwarming film uncovering the pop cultural silence surrounding the very common and emotionally demanding experience of miscarriage, great. (Private Parts)
Otherwise, shut up.
If you are interested in art films about surgical abortion, read "Beyond the Multiplex" instead of drivel and be informed about the plot of the winner of this year's Palme d'Or.(4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days)
Otherwise...
Consider why pop culture is about 'entertaining' instead of dramatizing statistic$. Hollywood divorce movies are rare too. (Kramer vs Kramer, War of the Roses) They simply aren't all that profitable, it has nothing to do with representing 'reality'. What a weird criticism of a business enterprise.
-
@Biff Pocaroba
"Oh, but what about women? How does this flick pander to them?"
Interesting question. I don't agree with your assessment, but it is a worthwhile question. Having been innundated with hype, I started thinking about the characterization of women as comediennes in Apatow's productions. I would have to go back and see Virgin again, and look closely at KU.
He doesn't pander to women, at least not well. Much as he loves wives and mothers, I get the feeling he sorta kinda hates women. A totally untested theory, but one I'm going to float for those of you rushing to the theatre.
-
Apatow certainly seems...
...to regard women as "Those who pretend to want independence/careers, but down deep really only want to settle down with man/baby and trap poor schlubs into marriage." He doesn't really seem to completely get it that women have their own existence and aren't just touchstones for men.
-
And it's ironic...
...that no matter what women do, some men can only see them as reflections of themselves. If you want to marry and have kids, you are a golddigger or a parasite. If you want to be single and have a career, you're doomed to be alone and a cat-spinster. That is why the more mysogynistic trolls 'round here get _so_ peeved off at articles that seem to imply women don't need them. If women don't need them, they down deep don't feel they really exist--or are real men. And they hate women for that.
-
KStone
Do I ever think a movie looks good or bad based on the preview? Of course I do.
Here's what I don't do:
I don't, not having seen a movie, contradict the opinion of someone who has seen it. Why? Because I have nothing to base my opinion on.
I don't go into letters blogs and say a critic has to be wrong when he or she can't be right because I saw the trailer and it looked just awful.
You can judge whether or not you want to see a movie based on a trailer -- if you allow advertising to be your only guide.
But when it comes to entering a substantive discussion about a movie -- if you haven't seen it, the least you can do is shut up.
-
Peter Johsua
C'mon, get down off your pompous high horse before you hurt yourself. Though the haughty sniffing about being guided by advertising is funny. People don't need your stamp of approval for their opinions of the movie review here or the movie in general. Most of the people here haven't seen the movie yet so they all should shut up about the review? Please. Or, more accurately, perhaps they should only shut up if you disagree with their opinion? That sounds more like it.
Anyway, so far most of the letters here, INCLUDING YOURS, are the usual back and forth comments about other folks opinions rather than the movie itself. So go heal thyself and whatnot. Oh well, we all must have been guided by Salon advertising the review as a main weekned item.
-
Should art imitate only the viewers' reality?
In reading the responses to the review, I have the same reaction that I have to many criticisms of movies and novels....Why does art always have to imitate the experience of the particular viewer? Art/Movies should expand all of our experiences. So it seems to me that those who tell a story should be allowed to tell their particular story, political implications and all. Screen writers should not be held responsible for the ultimate outcome of Roe v. Wade or anything else. They should be accountable for depicting choices made by real people. Authenticity is key.
That said, I am a very committed pro-choice person. Characters in movies (and novels, plays etc) have many motivations/ reasons for making the decisions they do. I for one trust women to make the right decisions for themselves. Movie viewers really should be open to hearing and experiencing the stories of others' lives for that is what good literature and good movies do for us...open us up to new ideas.