Well, in Sex And the City, the women are all hotties who can actually GET a man without having to pay for it. In Superbad, the guys are geeks, who have a very slim chance of getting any to begin with. It doesn't make them any more virtuous, but it's easier to identify with a loser. That's just my guess.
That's a good point I hadn't considered. All I was thinking, really, was *Hey, this is a good fantasy I like to watch. The guys get to enjoy their fantasy - a geekwad scoring a hot chick - so why can't I?*
I'm still waiting for the loser!girl equivalent of Superbad. You know. For the shluppy GIRLS with poor social skills who somehow, through no evident means or reason, manage to hook up with the well-grounded, sensible, successful, hot guys of their dreams.
I mean, the closest we've ever gotten on that count was Hairspray, and ONLY by virtue of the main girl being on the heavy side, which as we know, tends to be a no-no in the industry if you're not the comic-relief best friend or black. ...Except she was also talented, wonderfully gregarious, forward-thinking and principled, had a great sense of style, and was terribly pretty anyway. Soooo there goes that.
Maybe it says something that the hetero male geek!fantasy (referring solely to the Apatow archetype, mind) involves guys who never really improve themselves much (by our culture's baseline standards of "improvement") and still get what they want, while the hetero female geek!fantasy tends to revolve around the women being just as idealized as the men they want. Hmm.
Hmm. Maybe "fantasy" was too strong a word. I don't want to BE these women; I just want to be able to afford their lifestyles and carry their handbags. :-)
(Besides, when one of them fucks up, they get kicked in the ass for it. I'd pay good money to see the SatC version of AWE on Elizabeth, LOL.)
Girls aren't supposed to *want* sex! Yeah, look at Lauren Hutton on some show (Today?) the other morning claiming that Sex was written by "gay men who happen to be sluts". So, like, not even "normal" gay men want sex as much as the girls of S&TC. I think that the comment says a lot more about Lauren Hutton than it does about S&TC and its writers or fans.
Considering SatC was a popular series prior to being a movie, and "Superbad" only had other Apatow movies to recommend it, I think there's more word-of-mouth about SatC's movie than paid marketing. I know when I see some article about what a big deal it is, I think *You wouldn't know it by the marketing campaign - I've seen a few commercials, and the poster in theaters, and that's about it.* The only thing I can figure is SatC is being pushed as being more clever than its surface appearance - and it is - while "Superbad" was not, and in some ways, it also had some depth. *shrug*
The only marketing for S&TC has been via entertainment shows AFAICT. I haven't seen all that many commercials or trailers or ads for it. Superbad and its ilk, on the other hand, I saw lots of ads for.
No shoes for moi either. I'd like to bitch-slap Manolo Blahnik and Jimmy Choo until they swear to make only comfortable shoes.
In fact, I never understood the whole "Carrie is so fashion-forward" when a sometimes she seemed to be dressing in stuff she found in my aunt's closet that was left over from the 70s.
I'm pretty sure that Superbad wasn't about the pursuit of pussy and beer at all. I mean, the whole point of the movie was that actually getting the pussy and the beer did not make them happy. As in, at all. It was their friendship that was the most satisfying thing in the end, I believe - whatever the overall message may have been, if anything, it was "pussy and beer aren't the important things."
That, and just personally, I found it resonated much better than most teen movies wherein the "teens" are pimple-free twenty-somethings with scary racks and biceps. True, the guys who played Seth and Evan were in their twenties, but man, did they look like they were seventeen. Nobody does awkward like Mike Cera.
My point, however, is not even about the content of the movie. It's the fact that no matter what it IS about, it seems to the average person who hasn't seen it (at least the ones I know) that it's about the pursuit of pussy and beer. And yes, on the surface, it really is - just like SatC is, on the surface, about the pursuit of shoes and sex. Neither, of course, is that shallow. But while SatC gets a bunch of flak for having a negative influence on young girls (who shouldn't be watching it in the first place - GOOD PARENTING, I CAN HAZ IT?), "Superbad" is given a wink and a nudge 'cause well, boys will be boys. I mean - shouldn't we as a society be concerned about giving boys ideas about getting fake IDs and dancing with other guys' girlfriends, and shooting up cop cars? ;-)
We can both argue that the previews mis-represent the movies they're selling. GIRLS: Be like these women! It's the attractive thing to do! BOYS: Do all sorts of messed-up stuff! You won't have any responsibility! However. From an admittedly one-sided point of view (I have not seen a single episode of SatC) I find Superbad to be a cautionary tale in disguise. How much did it suck for Seth to have danced with another guy's girlfriend, only to get period blood on his leg? And how much did it suck for him to actually be that guy who brought the booze, only to overdo it and whiff his chance with the girl? How much did it suck for Evan to have the drunken girl of his dreams on his hands, only to realize that it would be taking advantage of her to sleep with her, and he was probably too drunk himself
( ... )
Comments 36
Reply
That's a good point I hadn't considered. All I was thinking, really, was *Hey, this is a good fantasy I like to watch. The guys get to enjoy their fantasy - a geekwad scoring a hot chick - so why can't I?*
Reply
I mean, the closest we've ever gotten on that count was Hairspray, and ONLY by virtue of the main girl being on the heavy side, which as we know, tends to be a no-no in the industry if you're not the comic-relief best friend or black. ...Except she was also talented, wonderfully gregarious, forward-thinking and principled, had a great sense of style, and was terribly pretty anyway. Soooo there goes that.
Maybe it says something that the hetero male geek!fantasy (referring solely to the Apatow archetype, mind) involves guys who never really improve themselves much (by our culture's baseline standards of "improvement") and still get what they want, while the hetero female geek!fantasy tends to revolve around the women being just as idealized as the men they want. Hmm.
Reply
(Besides, when one of them fucks up, they get kicked in the ass for it. I'd pay good money to see the SatC version of AWE on Elizabeth, LOL.)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Yeah, look at Lauren Hutton on some show (Today?) the other morning claiming that Sex was written by "gay men who happen to be sluts". So, like, not even "normal" gay men want sex as much as the girls of S&TC. I think that the comment says a lot more about Lauren Hutton than it does about S&TC and its writers or fans.
Reply
No, it's not... It's just so moronically stupid as to be unbelievable, but no one tries to market it to me the way they're trying with Sex...
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
In fact, I never understood the whole "Carrie is so fashion-forward" when a sometimes she seemed to be dressing in stuff she found in my aunt's closet that was left over from the 70s.
Reply
That, and just personally, I found it resonated much better than most teen movies wherein the "teens" are pimple-free twenty-somethings with scary racks and biceps. True, the guys who played Seth and Evan were in their twenties, but man, did they look like they were seventeen. Nobody does awkward like Mike Cera.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment