Knocked Up was, as David Denby put it in The New Yorker, the culminating artifact in what had become "the dominant romantic-comedy trend of the past several years—the slovenly hipster and the female straight arrow."

Thank God I found my slovenly hipster husband back before this trend, when he thought he was supposed to find a like-minded partner rather than a perfectionist life manager.

And thank goodness he hasn't noticed that I'm nothing like the woman he has been promised in almost every romcom made in the last decade. How am I going to keep the secret though?

The movie bugged me a little. In it's defense, I think the reason the dialogue between Rudd and Rogen sparkles in a way that Heigl's does not is partially because Rudd and Rogen are experienced ad libbers who know each other well. Heigl is not, which isn't her fault. Women in entertainment are rarely encouraged to ad lib. It is not an innate skill. The people who are encouraged to do it are the ones who will be good at it. If men are the ones encouraged to do it... encouraged to play fast and loose and take lots of chances, then they're the ones who will always come off loose and funny. Women, who are often hired based upon whether film executives find them attractive, are encouraged to worry much more about their continued attractiveness.

Did everyone see 40 Year Old Virgin? There are several extremely funny female performances in that film and I wasn't left with even a fraction of the yuck feeling I got from Knocked Up. Christopher Guest has no trouble finding funny women for his films. If a filmmaker wants women to be funny he writes a good part and casts a funny person in that part.

Heigl was hired to be a pretty killjoy, she knew it, and it wasn't a completely fulfilling experience for her. I have to sympathize.

The first paragraph above is a quote. When will I master html commands? Sigh.

You know, I wonder if this trend has to do with something I read a few article about last summer. Apparently, women are graduating from college in higher numbers than men these days (yay for us!) and also doing better in general. When some reporters went to find out why, they got a bunch of college guys saying things like "Well, it won't matter in my life whether I get a B- or an A+ as long as I pass, so why not just hang out and have a good time," and a bunch of college women talking about their focus on their plans for the future, their desire to do well, etc.

These articles are obviously flawed--this wasn't some kind of double-blind test. But I think this is a cultural current right now, the perception that women are succeeding and men aren't caring much (for my part, I think that there's an economic reality here, which is that men can literally afford to slack, because of the penile increment that accrues to them salary-wise, while women have to fight hard, still, to be paid what we're worth). And I wonder if these films are expressing a masculinist anxiety about female achievement by a) depicting a world in which loser guys get sexual access to the hot driven women and b) making the hot driven women seem unappealing in comparison to the loser guys.

"Women in entertainment are rarely encouraged to ad lib."

You mentioned Christopher Guest, but I want it to get more attention:

Jane Lynch, Parker Posey, and Catherine O'Hara absolutely steal Best in Show.

I agree with the points that have been made about Knocked Up on this site and everything, and when Katherine Heigl said how she felt about the movie she went from being a cool actress to one of my very favorite actresses.

However, to be fair, there was a slacker chick character in Knocked Up. The one with the line about how the new baby "might steal your food, but you wouldn't get mad because you're family!"

Yeah, a bit of a throwaway character. But still one of my favorites in the film. Personally I didn't think Knocked Up was all that great anyway. And I'm a total follower of the Apatow clique.

I think that there's an economic reality here, which is that men can literally afford to slack, because of the penile increment that accrues to them salary-wise, while women have to fight hard, still, to be paid what we're worth.

Not just to be paid what they're worth, to be allowed to do what they want to at all. And to be fair, Knocked Up did touch on this, which was one of the things I liked about it. The scene where Heigl's character was "subtly nudged" about losing enough weight to appear on camera, and the "doorman doorman doorman doorman" scene in which Heigl and Leslie Mann are barred from entering a club they used to go to all the time because of Heigl's pregnancy (which has the unwitting effect of making Mann suddenly look "old" standing next to her), illustrate this rather vividly.

Now, if you want to talk about why women who are the "attractiveness equivalent" of Seth Rogen or Jack Black will never ever be allowed to be romantic leads and how sexist that is...heck, I could write a book.

I think this is the "marge simpsonization" or "family guy wifing" or the "everyone loves raymonding" of women in relationships. I just wonder what young women think getting dosed with that on a regular basis? Do they picture themselves becoming the teeth grinding wife in their future?

In some of these threads, there is a reaction like people are heretics to suggest that there SHOULD be women slackers. OMG. Women being able to be chubby and fun and going to Vegas to shoot off steam? OMG. Women are supposed to be fulfilled being MOMMY. Teeth grinding, groaning, responsible ones, rolling their eyes at their boy-husbands.

Liberation is about also pleasure.

It kills me how women cannot be allowed to have even an imaginative real estate -- the movies, where life is easier and fun for them. Not every guy is a slacker like in Knocked Up, but the entertainment gives reassurance that a guy doesn't have to strive, strive, strive -- he can get sex and the prizes without being Mr Good Hair corporate display model. He can be "real" and "flawed."

In the entertainment landscape -- all virtual mind you, when we have a choice in the matter, we don't allow women to even exhale in the daydreams, our fictional creations, that are our movies.

I don't ENTIRELY blame that on Hollywood, although it's 90% of it and the men who green light projects.

It goes back into our own minds. Being raised where girls are brides for Halloween and pretty things only; not fun, exhalely, witty things. Even Amy Sedaris comments that when her movies are market studied, it's the young women who have the biggest problem with her being "ugly" to be a comedic character. It's being a female heretic to allow the woman who is chubby, casual, funny, without intense self-criticism to win -- EVEN in the imaginative landscape.

Now ain't that the weird part? That's a feminist issue.

"You leave feeling that what poor Debbie—and Alison—really wants is not a husband who knows to bring home pink cupcakes for a birthday party, but a culture that grants them the same indulgent latitude their partners get: the luxury of not having to be relentlessly responsible."

Yes, and maybe that was part of Apatow's plan?

I think this movie was fantastic, as I've said in every discussion on it. I think it was realistic and that that feeling, that "god they have got to be able to find a balance here" was completely on purpose.

I haven't seen this movie yet, but I wonder if it's not "a tiny bit sexist" because it is a pretty accurate depiction of our "tiny bit sexist" world (haha!). I mean, everything I'm reading here describes how I am. It would never even occur to me to slack off. At all. And maybe that's partly my personality, that I'm kind of a control freak, but it's also that I do not trust anyone else to take care of me. Period. Society isn't going to pay me what I deserve for doing what I love to do and am good at. I want to have kids and most guys I know think they have the luxury waiting their whole lives, so I'm the one planning my life so I can balance it with kids.

Partly I get this from my mom, who got it from her mom, who is the ultimate worry-wort. It's getting better by the generation (maybe if I have a daughter she will be carefree!), but right now I'm constantly thinking about the future, while my boyfriend hasn't thought farther than grad school.

On another note, I know there wouldn't have been a movie without it, but I still watch movies with women who don't want to be pregnant and am like, "Why don't you just have an abortion?" Like, hello, it is 2007. You don't have to have a baby if you don't want to. But that's to controversial for "liberal" Hollywood.

Um. I mean, I definitely respect that Heigl has the balls to say that about a movie that was so popular, a movie that really made her movie-famous. But at the same time---what about her next film? I keep seeing previews for 27 Dresses, and while I could certainly be wrong it seems like just another "I must get married before I'm too old and no one loves me" excersize in measuring a woman's value and happiness by her place in the domestic sphere. And that seems just as sexist, if not way more, than Knocked Up (and probably a lot less funny) especially because it is marketed towards women--just as Knocked Up expects its male fans to disregard the desires and needs of the slacker female, or the desires and needs of women at all, movies for women based entirely around weddings expect that THAT'S what women care about. And just as a lot of men keep going to see the slacker boy movies, a lot of women rush off to see movies where women find happiness and show it by getting married.

We all know that there are few good roles for women in mainsteam Hollywood, and I understand that for a woman like Heigl to be sucessful, she's going to have to play a ton of roles that could be considered sexist. Until there are more female writers and female directors making Hollywood films, doing otherwise will be difficult, I know. But it irritates me a little to hear a woman take a stand on one kind of sexism, and play right into another.

I also wonder, if there were more women-centered films that had interesting, complex, unstereotypical female characters, would movies like Knocked Up be such a problem? While I agree that it's sexist that the women get such short shrift in the film, ultimately it was a movie ABOUT Seth Rogen's character, and as the protagonist he is automatically granted the most complexity and attention. I dunno--I think that we're all really tired of women getting shafted because they do in EVERY movie. But in some magical world where that wasn't the case, I think there might be room for a movie like Knocked Up.

"a hilarious exploration of the difficulties of family life in the post-feminist age"

is it really the post-feminist age right now... cuz i see a lot of feminists everywhere...

I didn't find Knocked Up gunny because it was too realistic. I found my teeth grinding along with Leslie Mann's character and watching her mostly being portrayed as a harpy made me feel awful because I totally, 100% identified with her.

Movies that portray male-female relationships this way [demanding wife vs. lazy hubby] bother me so much. I know this was supposed to be a comedy, but the whole situation is just tired. What is it with society when boys are raised to think that they should always come first, even once they have kids, but women feel they must put everyone else first? Even if you go in to marriage and parenthood with eyes-wide-open to the dynamic, so much can still blind-side you. Like how even though your spouse says he wants to be an equal parent, you realize it's not even possible because while you're on hyper-alert status almost constantly ["is that thing she's climbing on safe?" "I better make sure to bring XYZ so baby stays happy" "what's that sound?" "what's that LACK of sound?"], he just tunes out with no problem and no guilt at all. That he can go away for a weekend and completely relax and feel wonderful; it's practically impossible for you because it's been ingrained in you from birth that you're the caretaker and you just can't turn it off. It's amazing and discouraging and there is no easy fix (at least not one I can see).

Uh, what? Tangent?

VisitingFeminist has a good point that, if there were more movies dealing with all the different variations of give-and-take in relationships then a movie like Knocked Up would be less galling. As it stands, it's just one more reminder-- for me at least-- of how much of an uphill battle life still is for women.

I think O'Rourke misinterprets male irresponsibility as fulfilling. These guys are miserable. They don't have anyway to express themselves other then getting high and going to strip clubs, which allows them to feel secure enough to tell each other that they are being bad mates.
The "fun" these guys are having masks their desire for real intimacy but are unsure about why they want it or even if they're suppose to want it.
So, while the women in the movie are unhappy the guys aren't really sure what's going on which is why they slack off. Aptow portrays it with humor but it's actually pretty pathetic.

I loved O'Rourke's essay. She definately nailed the reasons for my own discomfort at the film. Does anyone think that the fact that Apatow's wife plays Debbie in the film means a great deal? My feeling is that Debbie and Pete's relationship did not require a significant amount of imagination to create.

Those who say Heigl's character was a killjoy seem to be forgetting the sequence that showed her enjoying hanging out with Rogan's character and his buddies. Alison and Ben weren't completely unsuited to each other, and she wasn't a killjoy just for the hell of it. She objected to his lack of a job because it meant he wouldn't be able to help provide for the baby. He didn't have to move out and get a job, but he was willing to do it because he realized he had to responsible.

"just as Knocked Up expects its male fans to disregard the desires and needs of the slacker female, or the desires and needs of women at all, movies for women based entirely around weddings expect that THAT'S what women care about. And just as a lot of men keep going to see the slacker boy movies, a lot of women rush off to see movies where women find happiness and show it by getting married."

OK, now I'd like to see a comedy with a goofy heroine that ends with a slacktastic wedding. :)

OK, now I'd like to see a comedy with a goofy heroine that ends with a slacktastic wedding. :)

It's not a movie, but this fits the bill:

http://www.homeonthestrange.com

It's a webcomic that just ended. With a slacktastic wedding, no less!

"It's not a movie, but this fits the bill:

"http://www.homeonthestrange.com

"It's a webcomic that just ended. With a slacktastic wedding, no less!"

Yeah, Home on the Strage rocks. It's one of the webcomics I've been checking every day for a while. :D Now I wonder if they'll do the potential epilogue the site mentions...

"Does anyone think that the fact that Apatow's wife plays Debbie in the film means a great deal?"

Absolutely, I think it means that after you've been married for quite a long time, you will find yourself hitting rough patches like that couple was having.

I also think accepting the Rudd-Mann characters marriage at surface value is missing the point however. There was a lot more going on there than it seems on first viewing. For instance I see a lot of people saying they were unhappy, but I don't think they were. I think their relationship wasn't perfect, and that they were in a rut, but that's not the same thing.

Am I the only one who thought that the men in Knocked Up were laughed at much more than the women? The women in Knocked Up were sucsessful and really pretty good natured (the female lead tries to see the good points in her slacker boyfriend.) It is the men who look like fuck-ups and the women are the ones we can identify with. Anyway, that's what I came away with. Thoughts?

I agree that I do not think Rudd and Mann were overly unhappy or had a bad marriage. I don't think Mann regretted marrying Rudd, and I truly believe she loved him. But they have been married for awhile now, and the "honeymoon" is over, so there were in a bit of a rough patch. But my impression is that at the end for example, they were happy again, and I certainly wouldn't expect that they were set for a breakup or anything like that. I truly believe they love each other.

I'm also not 100% convinced that society doesn't "let" women be slackers. I know alot of women feel they can't be, but that doesn't mean society feels that way. Maybe I've just been lucky in who I've been surrounded with in my life.

I dunno, I guess it's because personally, I had trouble identifying with Leslie Mann's character. She was too... much. And I hated how she read his email and stuff like that. Maybe it's because I think of myself as a bit of a slacker, and I smoke pot and play video games and stuff too. So in some ways I actually identified with the guys more then the women in this film (though not with everything... just certain aspects of their lives/personalities).

I think it would be great however to see a movie that was essentially the reverse. I.e., instead of having someone like Seth Rogen be the lead character and slacker, have a woman be a slacker with a man that helps her to find a better balance in her life.

Because that's one of the key messages I took from this movie, that you need a balance. Seth Rogen and his friends were too lazy and too big of slackers, but then Leslie Mann and Heigl were too much the other way - ie: too serious and straight-edge and didn't pay enough attention to having fun. Both positions were too far to either side, and a balance of somewhere in the middle for both parties is much better.

I hated "Knocked Up." I thought the story was crappy and completely unbelievable. I thought the female characters were acting completely normal, and the male characters were rebelling. What women puts up with that kind of behavior? The female characters were also portrayed in too normative of a way, why cant they be more oddball, or slapstick like the men were. The women were the parents, and the men were the children in that movie, and I thought it stunk!

EG I completetly identify with your statement that these films are expressing a masculinist anxiety about female achievement. I came away from the movie with the idea that the film was portraying driven ambitious women seem unattractive and strict, while making the goofball males seem lovable, and humorous.

I mostly agree with you Lizzy. I didn't really see the guys as "fuck ups" but I definitely felt like we were laughing AT them a lot more than at the women.

its amazing how prevalent that dynamic is. has there been a mainstream romantic comedy of note in the last 5 years that didnt embrace either the super achiever type-a woman/lazy man or prince/local girl paradigms?

its a bit disconcerting and definitely has something to do with the rising angst men have in this modern world, not sure how to handle a lot of things, being surpassed in a lot of areas. Would be great to see a movie or show that truly delved into that and focused on the women not as kill-joys or completely accepting the expectations put upon them by the men.

I think a lot of this dynamic comes out of the fact that we're still struggling to revalorize maleness in the face of cultural changes that have more successfully stripped away the positive than the negative aspects of traditional ideas about masculinity, combined with an economic environment where getting married and forming a family is more likely to make you get poorer than better off. This provides an incentive to stay single with less responsibilities.

Setting a standard which says all the positive traits associated with masculinity in the past are not really male traits but universal human traits has tended to produce one of two responses in a lot of men: Either a fanatical defense of traditional male/female role divisions or else the Maxim-Reading Slacker Man Single viewpoint epitomized by the man-children who a frequent figure of contemporary comedy. Both are attempts to create a sense of one's own maleness as distinct from femaleness in an environment where such things as 'Who works in the public arena / who does the housework' is (in theory, if not always in practice) no longer easily accepted as a gender division.

In other words, the slacker man-child basically is trying to create a sense of his own maleness by adopting various behaviors more common in men than women (or at least which he thinks is the case)--by basically being a frat boy for life.

The Killjoy woman is basically a sterotype of feminists, though it avoids explicitly using the word--the sort of stereotype you'd expect male slackers to have of women, as they try to define themselves in opposition to what is now seen by them as a female archetype of the nagging, successful, disciplined, but no fun mother figure.

The Responsible But Kill-Joy Woman / Slacker Man-Child dynamic is a gender-reversal of the dynamic seen in, say, I Love Lucy, in the 1950s, in which the woman is the source of chaos and foolish behavior while the more responsible man ends up as the straight man. It is basically an exaggerated version of the long-term comedian dynamic of comic duos--the straight man and the chaotic source of humor man. Now adapted to make men the source of chaos and creativity, while women represent order and achievement.

This trend, in other word, reflects a combination of a classic comedy duo trope--the orderly vs the chaotic person (Bert vs. Ernie) with the redefinition of male and female roles inherent in male slacker culture, a redefinition which is an attempt to create a distinct sense of masculinity as distinct from femininity in an age in which the traditional roles have been challenged. (not the only response, but one which I suspect is far more common among media creators than the other major response of calling for a return to traditionalism.)

I hope that made sense.

Actually, that does make sense... the slacker is one archetype that women have not been especially eager to embrace. My own model of "positive" masculinity owes more to Steve Urkel than Maxim magazine, though. ;)

What we need is change. Freedom. And even if the world is crappy, we should see enjoyable women's lives and women who are allowed to exhale in the movies. Hey it's pretend. Why not cut ourselves some slack even in a darkened movie theater?

It is not as simple or even as enjoyable as man = creativity; woman = order.

There is allowance here for men that is privilege. A guy is allowed to let up on himself. Gain a few lbs. Wear casual clothes. Have quirky personality traits. Have the freedom for his space to play with his friends (and his friends are actually fun).

Meanwhile, her joybuzz is killed by society the last time she runs off to a bar. Even if she seeks it, she is not allowed. Her friends are shrills at the beginning of the movie. The movie is one long process of plucking away all females out of her life's influence, starting with her friends, her cold mom (who is the only one to suggest abortion), and her sister who is cut clean at the birthing in an asshole way by the guy. She is left clean of female influence by the time she gives birth. Isolation. Separation. No choice but him in the birthing room.

Meanwhile, the guy gets to keep his friends. And no doubt will be allowed fun steam-blowing trips in the future in the wacky part two: Knocked up II. See the groaning grumbling wife. See the Homer Simpson. Har, har, har.

This isn't a clinical, Jungian, dispassionate equation of order vs creativity. It's separate women from women and lead her to her true calling: being a mommy to her man and her baby. No other choice. No other blending.