Perhaps.. the second part of her statement is also her opinion?

I accept her opinion. I feel the same way about chick flicks. Let's call it even.

She said:

*snicker*

I appreciate you stating your stuff on this matter, but I find it a bit ironic that Katherine is complaining about being portrayed as a "humorless killjoy," when that's exactly what her statement makes her out to be.

Actors like Leslie Mann and Catherine Keener were awesome in their roles because they're funny people, but I would agree that for the most part the Judd Apatow movies are a boys club. Why not? Since when did script writing become an equal opportunity venture? If you want more vag in your giggles, then check out "30 Rock" or Margaret Cho (shudder). Personally, I think the funniest women out there are the Sarah Silvermans and the Wanda Sykes', but wouldn't they be considered sexist too?

well, to be fair, Catherine Keener's character in the 40 Year Old Virgin is written as having a lot of spirit spunk and character as well as a life of her own, she's pretty much the superior of Steve Carrell's character and is only snowed by him because hsi situation is so bizarre. That being said, I think thats easily the best of the Judd Apatow movies.

God dammit! You beat me to it, you bastard!

Oh, come on. She has to work with these people. Of course she had to say something. She didn't owe them an apology, but making nice is good for business. And frankly, if that was an apology, it was the most restrained apology I've ever seen. It looked more like a clarification to me, and a pretty good one at that.

I don't know if this makes me sexist, but I thought the movie was really funny, and: 1) I loved both the female leads 2) although funny, thought the guys came across as losers. The one redeeming quality of the co-protagonist is that he grew the fuck up. So, does this make me sexist?

It's a shame she finds it hard to love the movie that actually made her a name in the business and not just "that chick from Grey's Anatomy".

Yes, the guys in the movie were the focus of the comedy (and Leslie Mann had some pretty hilarious moments), but look at the characters - Rogen is a 23 year old unemployed stoner who got a girl pregnant and (for the most part) shirks most of the responsibility that comes along with it. Rudd is an apathetic smartass who doesn't seem to want anything to do with his own marriage.

Yeah, they said some pretty funny shit, but it's not like they painted the guys as angels and the women as devils. (Rudd gets a 1000 points for wearing a Tom Waits shirt though ).

I haven't seen the film so I can't comment on its sexist-ness.

What I wonder is if this a trend that should be on the sexism watch or not. Discussion and swirling is always good so here we are doing it now. However one problem seems to me to be that all films that cater to one gender aren't very balanced. In fact by virtue of being about the Other gender these films are loaded with fantasies and anxieties that may have to exaggerated in order to be expressed as THE subject of a fictional narrative. I'm pretty certain that this type of thing happens in romantic comedies directed to mostly female audiences as well.

Other examples can be found in other area of concerns. If you watch any of the few 80's punk era films, the wrongness of authorities and parents is clearly exaggerated and expressed as clearly deserving rebellion and angst so that there is no doubt that a teenager SHOULD be out of his or her mind with anger and pain.

Similarly, most queer tv fiction focuses more on the straight people who discriminate against queer people than the straight people who do not. In the L-Word for instance virtually every male character is unattractive, overly aggressive, discriminatory and generally insensitive and unaware of the feelings of the women in their lives. The reason for that is, this is the part of the story the fictional drama is trying to tell us.

In all of those examples the Other who is good is the token or the exception, and in a romantic situation with the Other this token person is brought to a whole new level and intensely romaticized. If this did not happen how would we know this "romantic interest" Other is different from the millions of other Others? All of the other Others have to be drawn as flawed is some way that is credible to the audience.

In real life there may be net feeling about who is good or bad and why, and even that may be based on different critical experiences by people of seemingly the same group. A narrative doesn't have the time to express that and simultaneously a main character's experience without losing the main character's experience into the background of the intensely large and diverse world they really live in.

So yeah it may be sexist, or it might be romantic in the classic sense of the word. Take your pick, pick your fights, fight them well.

In any case, we are faced with two choices:

Choice A- There is far less consensus in this world, thanks to diversity.

Choice B- There is far more consensus, though more abstraction, throughout diverse forms, thanks to diversity.

Knocked Up is so overrated it's scary. I think it's a dopey, senseless mess and a throwaway compared to 40 Y.O.Virgin and Superbad.

Yeah, they sit around for 2 years and they've never heard of Mr. Skin and they all act semi retarded. Uh...whatever.

Good article overall, but it is funny that you tell Heigl to "come on" about expanding on her statement and explaining sexism because any moron should understand what she said. You then spend paragraphs explaing sexism.

The problem is that you can't bag on a movie you agreed to do and not expect problems getting work afterwards. I knew as soon as I saw the statement earlier in the week that she was going to get shit for it and it could become a problem with ther career.

Total aside, but between Bitch Ph.D. and Sleepy Girl, is SG just ripping content straight from Feministing and comspensating the wrong people?

But yeah, this movie sucked. Except for the brilliant ad-lib opening scenes.

While it's true that there's a slight 'guy's movie' mentality to his films (though I know PLENTY of females who love all things Apatow), I don't think it's a question of sexism so much as it is that females just tend to be less fully developed as characters in Apatow productions. There are still plenty of striking exceptions to this - cf. Lindsay Weir and Kim Kelly in Freaks and Geeks and Trish in The 40 Year Old Virgin for glaring examples of beautifully real, original and funny women (yes, I know that Paul Feig created the initial characters of Lindsay and Kim).

To be honest, you can guess from the painfully real Freaks and Geeks that Judd and his milieu of collaborators grew up in a background of close male friendships and limited exposure to females due to rejection fears, lower social status, etc. Possibly as a result, they seem much more comfortable writing men (his film and tv have a particularly good grasp on the dynamics between male friends) than women, or at any rate are generally more adept at writing men. I don't see it as sexist in any sense, though as much as I love Apatow's films I think they probably could benefit from the involvement of a distinct female writing/producing presence along the lines of Seth Rogan's collaboration.

With regard to Knocked Up, I think people's perceptions as to exactly what constitutes a good character (is it that they're strong, or that they're funny?), and what exactly is a positive trait, is the real point of contention. I've heard from just as many people (male and female) who think that Heigl's character is the stronger one because she is a composed adult with real goals while Rogan's character is the weaker as a stoner in suspended adolescence, as I have from people (again, male and female) who think that Heigl is the less appealing humorless killjoy character you'd avoid and Rogan the gregarious, good-natured character you'd want to spend time with.