Hyperbole, Academia, Date Rape and The Dark Knight: The Internet’s Response to Observe and Report
It seems as though everybody who’s anybody in the movie blog-o-sphere is talking about Jody Hill’s new ‘edgy’ comedy hit(?) Observe & Report. Hot off the heels of a successful first season of HBO’s Eastbound & Down, Hill and his crew of regulars (Danny McBride, Ben Best and Tim Orr (longtime cinematographer of David Gordon Green)) are now pushing their unlikeable, unredeemable characters into the mainstream and the results are definitely interesting. On one hand, the internet is abuzz with hyperbolic expressions of praise; reminding me of the debate surrounding The Dark Knight’s worth as a cinematic ‘classic’. On the other hand, some folks just aren’t laughing. Is that really surprising though?
I remember when The Dark Knight came out last year and there was a massive butting of heads over whether or not the film was truly a ‘masterpiece’. While some people compared Nolan’s film to ‘Heat’ and ‘The Godfather’, the more skeptical viewers tried their best to drag its overzealous supporters back down to reality, reminding them that it’s just a comic book movie. The question was; Is The Dark Knight truly a great film or is it simply great in comparison to the other comic book films that came before it? It seems to me that Observe & Report is going through much of the same reaction, only the sides are reversed. It seems cynical audiences are now the ones spouting out the hyperbole in support of what some (Hunter Stephenson of /Film) claim to be ‘A contender for best film of 2009’. While I agree that it was a great film, I certainly don’t buy into some of the extreme, misguided praise it has been receiving.
The critical response to Observe and Report is pretty much as expected. A comedy featuring a main character that isn’t immediately likeable and has no redeemable qualities is bound to split audiences right in half. There’s a certain formula that most people expect from a modern comedy, and a likeable lead character is definitely a part of that formula. Putting Seth Rogen up front may have been a good choice financially, but has posed a critical risk. People will either respond as they have to Rogen’s past brand of comedy, or the despicable nature of his character will be amplified based on the fact that the typically likeable actor is going for something to completely different. A prime example? The ‘date rape’ scene. A quote from Femenisting.com (via The Huffington Post) :
“It’s not funny Seth. First of all, one out of six women in this country is sexually assaulted in her lifetime. Which means a whole lot of your bromen are confused about what consensual sex is. Is the laugh you get worth making them even more confused? Basically giving them permission from one of the most adored dudes of the moment to not take rape seriously? Yeah, we didn’t think so.”
When the femenists start accusing the beloved Seth Rogen of giving ‘Bromen’ permission to rape, it’s not hard to understand why critical praise for this film is split. Would the response be different if Danny McBride were cast in the lead? Probably. People are reacting aggressively to the against-type casting of Rogen — who’s popularity is probably at its peak — and it’s clearly reflected in the numbers (O&S is currently sitting at 52% on Rotten Tomatoes). So again, the critical response to O&S is both predictable and expected. It’s the bloggers that are of interest here.
After posing the question ‘Is Observe and Report a Classic in the Making?’ last October, Chud’s Devin Faraci admitted in his review that he’s “…not dumb enough to think that this movie is for everyone; there will be people who simply won’t understand why other folks are so desperately in love with it.” A sentiment proven by John Campea’s (The Movie Blog) two line Facebook status “review”: “John Campea can’t believe how completely horrible “Observe and Report” is. Just total garbage. Not one laugh. Just plain stupid. Avoid at all costs.” I was hoping for some elaboration on the actual website but there wasn’t a review to be found. The Movie Blog is, once again, late to the party on this one. Which is too bad considering Campea’s response to the film would make a great antithetical addition to this piece. Although to be honest, I feel the extremely negative reaction is more sensational than analytical. On the opposite end of the spectrum, /Film seems to have picked up their slack with a FUCKING LONG review/essay on Jody Hill, Observe and Report and the ‘glass brain girls’ who work at cosmetic counters.
Hunter’s post starts with a pretty strong (and to some, controversial) statement; he now anticipates Jody Hill’s films “more than any other working filmmaker with the exception of Paul Thomas Anderson.” The crazy thing is I don’t get the sense that this is merely debate bait. He’s serious. That’s totally cool. Opinions are like assholes on the internet; everybody is one. Unfortunately, things get ugly quick with a piece that I assume was intended to be an intelligent and bitingly witty analysis of both the ‘typical moviegoer’ (To which I say; Alienation isn’t just a TV show/movie from the 80’s) and America, only to fall completely flat on his own face. An embarrassingly snooty piece of writing that can only be described as the truest definition of pretention; making usually unjustified or excessive claims (in regards to Jody Hill’s film), and unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature (in regards to his own writing).
“There’s a faux-controversy over whether Ronnie rapes her. Whatever. I can’t wait to see what their kid looks like. It’s going to look like America.”
Fucking gag me. Seriously. If anyone wonders why I’ve expressed aggression towards academia, look no further.
“Generally speaking, there are two types of people, and as it lies, two types of moviegoers: Those who go to malls without a second thought and those who go into them only on the rarest of occasions, sucking on an imaginary Klonopin, those who walk around wondering how the fuck this and they and that sign came to be, pregnant with the speeding notion that a loon might as well destroy the entire fucking building or at least high-jack the “raffle car,” peel out through the entrance doors, and drive on to a fabled body of water.”
I worked at a mall for three years. I wonder what type of movie-goer that makes me? If this isn’t meant to be literal, it certainly isn’t literary.
“Are the glass-brain girls who work in Cosmetics actually real or do they render like trees in a perfectly waxed forest before your eyes? Over the last decade, many an American can ask a similar question of all the Wal-Marts that have risen like monoliths of national decline. Of the herds of obese Christian girls wearing Crocs further inflated by shopping bags at their sides. Of 50-year-old, wine sipping CNN and Fox News junkies formerly known as parents, done in by a long stretch of financial hardship and still a shorter stretch yet. Suze Orman says mwah. Of oh-so-many “movies” coming out of Hollywood. After experiencing the horror of the last nine years, Joe Viewer can get away with asking this question of reality, especially if he watched 9/11 go down inside a college dorm that he’ll spend the next 40 years paying off, possibly without health insurance.”
In direct response, I’ll pull out a favourite, and appropriate, quote I’ve used previously on this site:
“Academia is the death of cinema. It is the very opposite of passion. Film is not the art of scholars, but of illiterates.” — Werner Herzog
I don’t mean to pick on Hunter specifically or personally (only his writing), but the reason I bring up this example is because this sort of bloated, over-analysis and misplaced sense of importance (Hill’s “amazing and important second film” according to /Film) that threatens to undercut the film’s ultimate achievement; making people laugh while challenging mainstream formula. This isn’t rocket science. Jody Hill didn’t invent the anti-hero. In fact, within his small body of work, he’s already fallen into a formula of his own. Put The Foot Fist Way, Eastbound and Down and Observer & Report back to back and the recipe reveals itself; borderline sociopath, suffering from delusions of grandeur, attempts to convince those around them (and themsevles) of their worth. That’s it! And you know what? I love it! I’ve enjoyed every single film/show he’s released. But I’m not going to kid myself into thinking this is Taxi Driver 2. If I want a serious brand of biting satire and extreme darkness, I’ll watch a Todd Solondz film. Hell, even Borat – and the upcoming Bruno – are more worthy of the title of ‘most darkly astute mainstream comdey’. But it’s not me who’s holding Observe and Report up to these standards.
Here’s the thing; for me, a truly edgy and powerful dark comedy deals with situations and subjects that a large portion of its audience might relate to. Who really watches Observe and Report and relates to Ronnie? Disturbed people. That’s about it. This is exactly the reason why a date rape scene can exist in this film. You are not supposed to relate to Ronnie, you are supposed to pity him. You are watching a man slowly lose his shit. This isn’t something that speaks to people on a grand scale. Sure, lots of people lose their temper, but can you really say that you relate to the heroin scene? The shooting? The delusional nature of Ronnie’s character? His detachment from reality? Not likely. If this film is holding a mirror up to society, it’s a pretty small fucking mirror. On the other hand, how many people watch Borat and mistakenly interpret the satirical humour as sincere, laughing along at the Jew jokes? How many people do you think left that film saying ‘I know people like that’ or ‘Fuck that ay-rab’ or ‘THAT is America’? How many people can watch Todd Solondz ‘Happiness’ and relate to the relationship between the Father and son? Or the girl who’s constantly shit on by the people around her? Put this up against the relationship between Ronnie and his Mother, and it’s apples and oranges. The fact that I even have to compare the films is completely unfair to Observe and Report. People are placing a pretty massive agenda on the shoulders of this film (and Jody Hill) and I think when it comes to this brand of humour, it’s not doing the filmmakers any favours.
If the Nolan fanboys couldn’t protest the disclusion of The Dark Knight for best picture without a browbeating, then the pseudo-intellectuals pumping the fuck out of Observe and Report should get theirs too. Again, to be clear, I really do enjoy Jody Hill’s work. I’m a big fan of that entire North Carolina crew, and I think they’re really giving us some interesting characters to injest. It will be interesting to see if the tone of these films influences the output of mainstream comedies in the future. I can’t wait to see what those films look like. THEY’RE GOING TO LOOK LIKE AMERICA.
Comments (99)
I knew you were gonna quote that herzog line. I’ll agree with you up to the point where film analysis equals pretentious academia. That’s where we part ways. There’s a line people cross after which people are simply inflicting their agenda upon a film. But that doesn’t mean examining a film’s message is pretentious or wrong. Movies are an art form and therefore carry messages, they reflect the society that produced them.
Posted by Rusty James on April 14th, 2009Not inquiring about the message is like only watching half the film.
I didn’t say film analysis equals pretentious academia.
Film analysis is as pretentious as the person touting the theories. I would sit through a shot-by-shot analysis of Citizen Kane as hosted by Roger Ebert. I would not sit through a shot-by-shot analysis of Citizen Kane as hosted by Hunter Stephenson.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009@ I didn’t say film analysis equals pretentious academia.
got it. But I’m saying the academic “lets examine the socio – political feminist environmental blah blah blah” can be good as well. That stuff is part of film watching as well.
I think it’s an important part of watching Birth of a Nation, and Eisenstien. And I think Dark Knight and Transformers have messages like that as well.
Ultimately, I think this type of film analysis gets a bad rap because it’s an almost sure fire way to out yourself as a pretentious small minded hateful (probably rascist and specist) twit. Like poetry, it’s practiced in public only by fools.
But it’s still relevent.
Posted by Rusty James on April 14th, 2009between this and Adventureland, Campea is 0/2 for good comedies in 09. hope he gets more laughs out of Transformers 2!
Posted by Goon on April 14th, 2009Also, I have a new favorite herzog quote
Civilization is like a thin layer of ice upon a deep ocean of chaos and darkness. -WH
Posted by Rusty James on April 14th, 2009Great essay Jay. Not every podcast/blog was so polarized. I enjoyed the parts of the film that worked for me. I didn’t think the overblown consequence free violence worked in this kind of movie but I still had to give it credit for trying.
Posted by Ian on April 14th, 2009I think its within reason for people to trumpet the film as something great (especially if they’re not familiar with Hill’s formula). Its another thing entirely to use it as your springboard into some ridiculous rampage against all of america…
because thats the job of Lars Von Trier films
Posted by Goon on April 14th, 2009“got it. But I’m saying the academic “lets examine the socio – political feminist environmental blah blah blah” can be good as well. That stuff is part of film watching as well.”
I’m not criticizing analysis, i’m criticizing Hunter Stephenson’s analysis. I disagree with him. Disagreement is part of film watching as well.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009@ i’m criticizing Hunter Stephenson’s analysis
I just read it… it’s my new favorite thing ever… “are the glass-brain girls who work in Cosmetics actually real or do they render like trees in a perfectly waxed forest before your eyes?”
It is a national treasure. Like I said, art criticism is an almost sure fire way to make an ass out of yourself.
Jay, have you read Devin Faraci’s article on the “date rape” scene in Wall E?
Posted by Rusty James on April 14th, 2009No, I haven’t. I think I’ve seen references to it on /Film or Twitter or something. I’ll have to check that out. Sounds entertaining.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009I’m reminded of an article Ben Affleck wrote for Premiere Magazine years ago… In it, he basically interviews himself (making a clear distinction between what he’s supposed to say as a celebrity/actor/interview guy and what he actually thinks) and, for some reason, this really stuck in my mind:
Question: Are movies important?
Interview Guy: I think they can be. You go see Anaconda and you know you can’t take a river trip with Owen Wilson, a rapper, and the guy from Deliverance, ’cause it’s gonna end badly. Fuck, come to think of it, that was the second bad rafting experience for Jon Voight. There’s a fucker you really don’t want on your Outward Bound crew…
Actual Ben: No.
So yeah, I agree with you Jay. I took a visual semiotics course in college, and trust me, NO ONE is as pretentious as these “scholars”. It CAN be fun to disect movies and try to get to the bottom of their hidden messages and themes — but at the end of the day, it’s just a movie. And I love him, but who the fuck is taking advice from Seth Rogen’s movies?? Are we also supposed to go out and make pornos and become cops so we can buy alcohol for a loser teenager and then destroy the police car??
Also, fuck man, you’re quoting Herzog and I’m quoting Affleck. You win.
(you can find that article here: http://gatochy.blogspot.com/2005/01/who-hell-does-ben-affleck-think-he-is.html)
Posted by jim on April 14th, 2009since someone from Slash may ending up reading this thread
Dear Slash,
Posted by Goon on April 14th, 2009Please fix your sites shitty navigation and make it easier to find things. YOUR SITE IS TERRIBLE TO PUT UP WITH AND I HAVE TO RESORT TO GOOGLE EVERY TIME.
Yours truly,
Mr. Fun
The video in this post is extremely annoying specifically because it targets Rogen and forgets that Anna Faris was a willing participant in it… selective finger pointing.
Posted by Goon on April 14th, 2009You know what the alarming thing is? After all this discussion, I’ve developed an inclination to see this movie. Kill me now. (It’s either this or a date with Zac Efron on Friday. April sucks.)
[As a point of clarification, I don't think the fine ladies at Feministing are responding to the problem of a usually likeable actor playing against type; they're taking issue with a quote from Rogen about the movie (quoted in their article but not here) where he says Ronnie is fully aware of the fact that he is sexually assaulting Brandi but that Brandi's obviously inebriated (and thus not really consensual) "why are you stopping?" line makes the preceeding sexual assault okay. Possibly poor phrasing on his part, but I think it's his attitude to the scene that sparked their particular rant more than it being a strong negative reaction to adorable B.O.B. from "Monsters vs. Aliens" suddenly portraying a rapist.]
Posted by Liz on April 14th, 2009I seriously doubt that this feminist has even seen the film, as most of haters of anything tend to do.
Brilliant piece Jay, more please. Now I just have to see the damn film, have no idea when it’s out in my neck of the woods.
Posted by swarez on April 14th, 2009And that would also be why the video rant doesn’t target Faris, I’m guessing.
Posted by Liz on April 14th, 2009Liz: I think the specific line about him being ‘one of the most adored dudes of the moment’ and referring to his ‘bromen’ seem to be references to his status and his filmography. Unless of course, by ‘bromen’ she’s simply referring to men in general, in which case I respond with ‘go fuck yourself’. (Her, not you)
Goon: “The video in this post is extremely annoying specifically because it targets Rogen and forgets that Anna Faris was a willing participant in it… selective finger pointing.”
So true.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009“And that would also be why the video rant doesn’t target Faris, I’m guessing.”
Also possibly the case. However, I would think she would at least address Anna Faris’ involvement, especially considering it’s in the nature of all ‘bromen’ to date rape either way.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009Truthfully, I couldn’t tell if her use of the word “dude” in both “Mr. Broman Comedy Dude” and “one of the most adored dudes of the moment” was meant sarcastically or not.
Posted by Liz on April 14th, 2009Jay – I was thinking you would pick up on one of the other rich items in the internet craziness around Observe and Report. I was actually lead to this “smoking gun” quote Seth Rogan made by Liz:
The clip from the scene is at the 2:40 mark. Rogen’s take on date rape:
SETH ROGEN: when we’re having sex and she’s unconscious like you can literally feel the audience thinking, like, how the fuck are they going to make this okay? Like, what can possibly be said or done that I’m not going to walk out of the movie theater in the next thirty seconds? . . . And then she says, like, the one thing that makes it all okay:
BRANDI: “Why are you stopping, motherfucker?”
What I find more interesting than the fact all of the feminists are using this as a “smoking gun” to prove the scene’s intent is to be a date rape scene, is the fact that the filmmakers basically knew beforehand that this scene would be so on the line it would fuel controversy and ultimately fuel interest in the film. That’s some ballsy filmmaking, yo! And isn’t that what we all want from our movies – films that create discussion.
But it gets deeper, the original interview has been removed from the web:
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/08/observe-and-reports-date-rape-apologism/
This is bigger than the Zapruder Film!
Posted by rus in chicago on April 14th, 2009I knew Seth Rogen couldn’t have fired off three shots that quickly from the book depository! Oh, internet, don’t ever change.
Posted by Liz on April 14th, 2009The thing that pisses me off about this argument is that it takes away from the actual film, and instead makes it into “the date rape” movie, when there are two million other things to be said about it. The Date Rape scene (which I don’t think should even be considered date rape) took up 2 minutes of 90, get over it.
Posted by Drew on April 14th, 2009If you don’t want to rag on academia, and only poor academia, then the Herzog quote is misplaced.
This guy you’re quoting writes like a writer. Nothing is more annoying that writers who write like writers.
Posted by Henrik on April 14th, 2009Unfortunately Drew this is what happens. Believe me the filmmakers are loving all the web discussion. Just like Paul Thomas Anderson liked all the talk about the “money shot” in Boogie Nights, just like the Hallie Berry sex scene in Monster’s Ball, just like the Vincent Gallo oral sex scene, just like the interrogation scene in Basic Instinct. Filmmakers are not that far removed from carnival barkers.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 14th, 2009“If you don’t want to rag on academia, and only poor academia, then the Herzog quote is misplaced.”
Poor academia is still academia. And just because I’m not ragging on it doesn’t mean I personally couldn’t do without it.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009I guess your probably right Rus, but I just feel kind of bad that Jody Hill and Seth Rogen went out and tried to do something different for a change and there efforts are now being shit on because of a minute long sex scene that might be considered date rape.
Posted by Drew on April 14th, 2009I feel Jody Hill would be more concern if no one was talking about what he has done. I believe the Hollywood term is “heat” and I think one aspect of “heat” is the fact the public is talking about you. I believe silence would be death for Jody Hill.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 14th, 2009That’s true, as long as this dosent take away from hill doing a third film I’m fine.
Posted by Drew on April 14th, 2009Jay, I don’t see how Fred Simmons and Kenny Powers were the same charecter as Ronnie. They were more likeable especially Fred Simmons who was just a friendly guy who is pushed over the edge. Kenny is an asshole who tries to fix himself, but Ronnie is just a phsyco who never even thinks of changing. So I think there all pretty different.
Posted by Drew on April 14th, 2009Drew, I’m not saying these are carbon copies. I’m saying the themes in these three films are extremely similar, as are the characterizations. They all suffer from extreme delusions of grandeur and are despicable in their own ways.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009I just want to add that I thought the Date Rape scene in Beethoven’s 2nd was disgusting and uncalled for…I don’t care who says it was artistic!
Posted by Bob The Slob on April 14th, 2009That is true Jay, thinking about it more now it’s probably a good thing Danny McBride wasn’t cast, that would of made made them even more similar
Posted by Drew on April 14th, 2009Best line in the piece: “Opinions are like assholes on the internet; everybody is one. ” Well Said.
Posted by kurt on April 14th, 2009Observe & Report vs. Happiness is that one is an edgy mainstream comedy that steers occasionally close to uncomfortable and the other is an uncomfortable art-house drama that steers occasionally close to comedy.
Intensity in the middle of the mundane (Ronnie’s Psycho in the Mall, Dylan Baker’s molester in the ‘normal suburban home) is often what makes memorable drama. It’s the quiet countryside with flutes in the background for several minutes and dear walking by the suddenly sees the detonation of a nuke. Pretty memorable. Until it is done 1000x times, the somehow the human mind finds a way to process this as ‘boring.’ Currently Borat/Bruno, Observe & Report, and yes, the entire filmography of Todd Solodnz still manages to surprise. So I don’t mind putting them in the same sentence, even if they all go about what that go about for different reasons and in different ways. They are still all kissing cousins that have things to say about modern American society.
Hope that didn’t sound too academic folks.
Posted by kurt on April 14th, 2009Fuck, I need to proofread my shit, typos fixed below:
Observe & Report vs. Happiness is that one is an edgy mainstream comedy that steers occasionally close to uncomfortable and the other is an uncomfortable art-house drama that steers occasionally close to comedy.
Intensity in the middle of the mundane (Ronnie’s Psycho in the Mall, Dylan Baker’s molester in the ‘normal suburban home’) is often what makes memorable drama. It is the quiet countryside with flutes playing in the background for several minutes and deer walking by that suddenly sees the detonation of a nuke.
Pretty memorable…
Until it is done 1000x times, then somehow the human mind finds a way to process this as simply ‘boring.’
Currently Borat/Bruno, Observe & Report, and yes, the entire filmography of Todd Solodnz still manages to surprise. So I don’t mind putting them in the same sentence, even if they all go about what they go about for different reasons and in different ways. They are still all kissing cousins that have interesting things to say about modern American society and the filmmakers that grow up within.
Hope that didn’t sound too academic folks.
Posted by kurt on April 14th, 2009Kurt, you should really sit down with Eastbound and Down. Out of the three projects Jody Hill has helmed, I think that one is the most suited to be placed alongside the likes of Todd Solondz and Borat/Bruno. It’s got some big laughs, but it’s lows are much lower.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009More specifically, the relationship between Kenny Powers and Stevie Janowski is particularly Solondz-esque and at times, quite unsettling.
Posted by Jay C. on April 14th, 2009“What I find more interesting than the fact all of the feminists are using this as a “smoking gun” to prove the scene’s intent is to be a date rape scene”
Its an abused quote, when what he’s talking about is how they can make that scene and find some limit to keep people from walking out.
Anyways, I watched All the Real Girls today, which I only mention for the strong McBride connection between it and Jody Hill. In one of the deleted scenes where McBride is pretty much clearly riffing he’s talking about banging some girl while she was unconscious… kind of uncanny to come across that while this is happening.
SMOKING GUN?
DUN DUN DUN
Answer – no.
Posted by Goon on April 14th, 2009Its hard to say seeing as the original video has mysteriously been removed???? Maybe the producers are trying to cover their tracks??? I’m sure people assoc. with this website have better internet search processes then me. I stopped here:
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/08/observe-and-reports-date-rape-apologism/
Posted by rus in chicago on April 14th, 2009Eastbound & Down indeed is Hill’s best work to date. I love Foot Fist Way but having seen his other two projects it is in comparison kind of a rough draft.
The talk about Hill and his formula, I hope its a given that he’s not alone in having something like this. And I don’t really care, at least not yet. Look at Wes Anderson – film after film of rich people with daddy issues. And it doesnt bother me so long as he can still make the characters interesting.
Posted by Goon on April 14th, 2009I just finally watched the tail end of the embedded video from Feministing
“You’re giving them permission to not take rape seriously”
This is the kind of statement that makes me want to stoop to calling her a bitch, just because I know such a word would get a rise out of her. But I’m sure that would only make her believe she was right, so a simple “fuck you” will suffice.
To everyone in this thread, if you laughed at any violence in film ever? Congratulations, apparently you gave permission to the people around you who saw you laugh to not take violence seriously. You are a second hand violence enabler! We should put you in cuffs!
Posted by Goon on April 14th, 2009THANK you for calling bullshit on Hunter’s review. Someone needed to do it.
That is all.
Posted by Tracey on April 14th, 2009I enjoy Jody Hill’s work (’Eastbound and Down’, ‘Fist Foot Way’). the only connection I have to Rogen’s character in this film is that he is pretty much my room mate from college… he worked as a mall security guard, was taking police foundations, came from a bit of a broken home and would have fits of rage–punching holes in the walls. this and a mixture of dark humour has become what i might call ‘Office Space’ for mall goers. an inversed ‘Mallrats’, if you will.
I think this controversy over a supposed ‘rape’ scene is just rediculous. no one needs to apologize because it never actually happened in real life, if you have a brain you’d realize they’re not condoning this–it’s just showing the way things happen in real life. stupid mistakes. and that’s what it was, a mistake. not rape.
Posted by Ryan on April 15th, 2009Given Jay’s disparagement of Hunter Stephenson’s review, I just had to check it out even though I haven’t seen “Observe and Report.” Hunter articulates and elaborates on his passions and convictions. All else I can say is that I should be writing for /Film.
Posted by Reed Farrington on April 15th, 2009Reed: Well, they ARE searching for new (payed) writers currently
Posted by Kasper F. Nielsen on April 15th, 2009Although I did say before that it might of been a good thing not to cast Danny McBride because of simmilarites with Hill’s previous works, this is a movie that might of played better to a limited release and a no name star. I think part of the problem might of been the advertising, they did play it off to be almost Blart Part Deux in the commercials. Which might of been a bigger reason it didn’t do so well rather than because of the dark tones. Because I don’t think the general public really knows anything about this movie besides it has another mall cop in it.
Posted by Drew on April 15th, 2009“Friday Feminist Fuck You”
I should not have watched the video. I want to kill this ignorant bitch. You know what is as bad as writers who write like writers? People who start their own comments by padding themselves on the back, especially when they go “As you all know…”
Posted by Henrik on April 15th, 2009I agree Henrik, the worst thing about that video was that she probably hasn’t even seen the the actual movie, but is instead making a bullshit editorial video from something she only read off the Internet. Even worse she only directs her hate to Rogen who is only half of the equation, she obviously dosen’t know anything about the actual and is a complete and utter idiot.
Posted by Drew on April 15th, 2009I also love how she uses her love of Wanda Sykes as a defense for herself to try to say that she isn’t like most feminists. What a fucking tool.
Posted by Drew on April 15th, 2009Hunter Stephenson is not an academic, and the blogs he posts that express his opinions are not academic writing.
Posted by Al on April 15th, 2009Having just read Stephenson’s review of O&R, I certainly enjoyed the read. Hyperbolic and occasionally pedantic yes. A little over the top, but you can’t deny the enthusiasm there.
While I don’t think that O&R will be one of the 10 best of the year, it is still a pretty fabulous film (J.H. formula or not) that is worthy of mucho discussion, which has been pleasantly fast and furious this week.
Posted by kurt on April 15th, 2009Did anyone here actually find the sex scene funny, I did, but I feel the why’d you stop motherfucker is a bit of a cop out which Hill admits too in a interview
http://www.avclub.com/articles/jody-hill,26484/1/
Posted by Drew on April 15th, 2009Wow, that is some really good stuff Drew. Basically it is more evidence that Jody Hill’s intent was to have Farris’s character passed out and he was o.k. with all the things that implies. He also talks about how Seth Rogan really went to bad with the studio for everything Jody wanted to do – accessory. Man, the feminist are going to lose their shit. I still like the film, but Jody is willing to do some wild shit – could you imagine if Farris hadn’t said anything in that scene! There would be actual protests. I listened to Row Three’s podcast last night with their two female commentators and those women stated they fear for what Jody Hill might have done in his past if he doesn’t think the scene, as constructed, is an example of date rape. They are going to flip when they see this interview. More power to you Jody, I don’t think I could do that in a film!
Posted by rus in chicago on April 15th, 2009I meant to say the /film filmcast, not Row Three…
Posted by rus in chicago on April 15th, 2009I started reading Hunter’s review yesterday.
Just finished it.
Posted by chris on April 15th, 2009Observe and Report is dark and wacky. In tone, it’s sort of like Death to Smoochy, or the Cable Guy. It’s not for everybody… but I really liked it and consider my theatrical viewing of it money well spent.
Posted by pureevilmatt on April 15th, 2009Another item I’ve been thinking about lately is Fast Times at Ridgemont High. As many of you know, this is a female directed coming of age comedy that gave the world Sean Penn. What many forget is the statutory rape scene in that film that is both shocking and darkly funny. Of course women love the film because of it’s frank and honest take on high school age women wanting to experience sex and the troubles that come along with your first few times. Why is the statutory rape in this film o.k. but the date rape overtones in O & R not acceptable? Because this is a male centric movie? It appears in both cases the female was equal parts in and out of control. They are both comedies. Interesting.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 15th, 2009But Rus, you should be listening to the Row Three podcast.
Posted by Kurt on April 16th, 2009pureevilmatt – Smoochy and Cable Guy are both very good films. Wacky is a good word, there is wackiness in O&R for those with the right sense of humour. I even got a bit of an Office Space and Mallrats vibe in there too.
Posted by Kurt on April 16th, 2009Kurt, I already admitted to cheating on Greg, Sean and Jay don’t you dare try to get me to come over to your place and get me drunk on your film flavored wine – that’s film rape and its not o.k., anywhere! U got it buster!?
Seriously, I do need to spend more time on your site.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 16th, 2009It’s only date rape if the chick feels violated though, right? I mean rape is only sex, where somebody is forced. Drunken sex is not rape.
Posted by Henrik on April 16th, 2009That’s the big problem I have with some of the feminist response to O & R. As the scene stands now in the film, they claim that it is clear date rape. Farris character is obviously a participant in the act up to a certain point, but these feminist state “whenever the female looses the ability to make a coherent choice in the matter it becomes date rape”. (listen to /filmcast) How are we men supposed to define were the woman should not be trusted in her judgment!? They seem to want and dump this scene in to the same group as one showing a guy slipping the women drugs without her knowing. And with this line of thinking the feminist could claim that the sex in the other Seth Rogan film Knocked Up is date rape! The female there was clearly making choices affect by to much alcohol – it is the plot point of the movie! They also don’t bring up the point, as you do here, that Farris’s character did not feel she was date raped. And if anything I think Jody Hill did a good job of showing Farris character is of mindset that lives this way – lifestyle of massive amounts of drugs and sexual activity.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 16th, 2009“It’s only date rape if the chick feels violated though, right? I mean rape is only sex, where somebody is forced. Drunken sex is not rape.”
I believe the whole point is that when someone is inebriated to the level of not being able to make thoughtful choices and decisions, the ensuing sexual act would be a violation. Also, I think another distinction to be made is whether or not the male is also inebriated.
Posted by Jay C. on April 16th, 2009See Kim Voynar on this. Her take is pretty level headed on the failed logic mainstream-feminist approach to date-rape: http://www.moviecitynews.com/columnists/voynar/2009/090415.html
“There’s an inherent contradiction that a lot of feminists seem to prefer not to discuss at all: if we say that a woman who is inebriated by her own choice is therefore no longer responsible for the sexual choices she might make while in that state, is it fair to argue that the man she’s with, if he’s also inebriated, should be responsible for making that choice for her?
Would writers who argue that the sex scene in Observe and Report is date rape also be willing to argue that if a man has sex when he’s “too drunk” to make a sober decision, he no longer has responsibility for the consequences of that sex, such as pregnancy or spreading a STD? How can we seriously argue that a man who gets chooses to get too drunk and has unprotected sex IS responsible for the consequence of that choice (and even demand that he pay child support for the resulting infant, should the woman choose not to abort the pregnancy — a choice over which he has no control) on the one hand, while arguing on the other that if a woman chooses to get herself too drunk to make a sober decision, the full responsibility for that choice must also fall on the man?
Men are not the enemy, and I grow weary of the twisting of ideas of female sexuality and female empowerment into an ugly worldview where the women are always right, the men are always wrong, and women want all of the freedom they see men as having while refusing to accept the responsibility that goes along with it. “
Posted by Kurt on April 16th, 2009No one awnsered my question
. Did anyone find the Sex Scene funny? I’m not going to lie about it, I did.
Posted by Drew on April 16th, 2009Thanks for the link to that Voynar article, Kurt. It was fantastic.
Posted by Wintle on April 16th, 2009Drew, I don’t think anyone is hiding their answers here. I’m pretty sure almost everyone taking part in this discussion — minus Liz perhaps, but I don’t think she’s seen the film — found that scene, along with the rest of the film, funny.
Kurt: I agree with that quote. Another thought; If an inebriated person drives drunk and kills someone, they are to blame. They are considered aware enough to make the conscious decision to get behind the wheel of a vehicle at the risk of their own life and the lives of others. They are considered selfish, self-absorbed and irresponsible.
I guess the big difference here is sex takes two to tango, so that outside encouragement might be the key element that encourages someone to take part in something they otherwise might not do. So is this then comparable to a sober friend that fails to take their drunk buddies keys? Are they legally responsible for holding the hand of the person who couldn’t be responsible with their actions? No. POSSIBLY a bartender could be looked at for over-serving a patron, but beyond that, the responsibility of that drunk drivers actions lie entirely on their own shoulders.
Again, I think the important detail here is the state of mind of both participants at the time of the act.
Posted by Jay C. on April 16th, 2009lets cut to the bone why this really matters. beyond similar situations like drinking and driving, etc. everyday in America, men are being convicted of rape in whatever form it is and the very fact that many women have the attitude that when a woman “loses the ability to decide if she wants to proceed” then rape is taking place is extremely unfair and hard to define. All sexual encounters are basically a he said, she said situation (beyond signs of physical violence) and this idea lots of women have is scary.
from a website, The charge of “date rape” refers to instances of rape when the accused offender and victim have a pre-existing relationship or, in some cases, when the victim was a companion of the accused offender at the alleged time of the crime. Charges of rape are often based largely on the testimony of the accuser and defendant. Often, there are no material witnesses or physical evidence. In the case of date rape, the accuser may even be the spouse of the defendant.
In such cases, the preparation of one’s defense requires careful pre-trial investigative work. Often, criminal history, psychological profiles, possible motives, character witnesses and other circumstantial information can be obtained to keep these cases from going to trial.
Rape charges can be difficult to prove. An aggressive, skilled defense and early intervention can be quite effective in these cases.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 16th, 2009@ I also love how she uses her love of Wanda Sykes as a defense for herself to try to say that she isn’t like most feminists.
That gets my vote for low point of the video.
Posted by Rusty James on April 16th, 2009I think it is funny that there is so much Internet hubbub over a film that opened wide yet will be out of theaters in three weeks.(Seriously, the funniest line in the article is the line calling this a “hit?” – um, no a hit is a film that a lot of people go and see and makes a lot of money. This is what you call a film that may get its money back when it goes to DVD – maybe.
I also find it interesting that the North Carolina boys got their deals because they were so hilarious and now that not that many people are laughing at their jokes their defenders are claiming Hill’s flicks are deeper than that.
Emperor’s new clothes. Nothing more, nothing less.
Fact is,
Posted by Bill on April 16th, 2009“Seriously, the funniest line in the article is the line calling this a “hit?”
There was a reason Jay put a question mark next to hit in parenthesis.
Anyways, I just wanted to bring up that i’ve noticed that alot of people have been attacking Jody Hill as a person and villifying him, and I think thats something you just shouldn’t do, you can attack the movie all you want, but I don’t think you should make the director seem like a bad person.
http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2009/04/jody-hill-on-the-observe-and-report-rape-scene.html
Posted by Drew on April 17th, 2009“They are considered aware enough to make the conscious decision to get behind the wheel of a vehicle at the risk of their own life and the lives of others. They are considered selfish, self-absorbed and irresponsible.
I guess the big difference here is sex takes two to tango”
While I’d also agree that the universal hatred of date rape has probably over-mitigated the other persons responsibility, yeah – the big difference is that a car can’t take advantage of a human being, a car can’t choose to stop what its doing.
When its two people in a sexual scenario, they have a responsibility to each other. On the road, a drunk person behind the wheel has a responsibility to well… everyone.
Posted by Goon on April 17th, 2009“Also, I think another distinction to be made is whether or not the male is also inebriated.”
Yes, this would make a huge difference. Rogen has drunken sex in “Knocked Up” but there’s no uproar about it because both he and Katherine Heigl are supposed to be intoxicated in the scene. They’re both making mutually stupid decisions but neither is taking advantage of the other. If a sober Rogen had got Heigl drunk in that movie (or vice versa), then we’d have a date rape debate on our hands.
Rape is not simply about sex but about the abuse of a power imbalance — when one person is drunk and the other is not, the sober person is in a position of power and control in the situation. As Goon mentions above, they able to make the decision to take advantage of someone or to stop what they are doing, whereas a drunk person cannot always do that. If both parties are drunk (or if neither are drunk, I suppose), they are on a relatively equal playing field when it comes to consent.
Anyway, is Ronnie also inebriated in the scene? I couldn’t tell from the tailer since Faris seems to play the scene very OMG SO DRUNK and Rogen merely seems infatuated but sober (unless that’s how he’s chosen to play drunk for this movie). I’ve been under the impression this whole time that he is indeed sober, since my understanding of the way the humour is constructed for this scene is that it absolutely relies on him being sober, but if I’m wrong please let me know.
Posted by Liz on April 17th, 2009“Rape is not simply about sex but about the abuse of a power imbalance — when one person is drunk and the other is not, the sober person is in a position of power and control in the situation.”
this is the bullshit I’m talking about. date rape as a term started after increased situations of guys slipping drugs in to women’s drinks to take advantage of them and in situations were couples that knew each other, one of the parties forces the other party to conduct sexual activities. Now women, like Liz, want to bend those ideas to cover situations were the women VOLUNTARILY drinks or uses drunks to the point their decision making process is foggy and the man is to blame if the next morning the women feels wronged. Its a bullshit, cover our ass, feminist rhetoric. Classic, we want all rights and privileges afforded to men, unless, we abuse controlled substances then you men need to monitor our actions.
And yes, Ronnie is drinking too in the scene from the film you have never seen.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 17th, 2009Liz, Explain this view to all of the men that have been wrongly accused, prosecuted of date rape across the world and have lost their job, standing, visitation rights to their children, etc.
You think you are protecting women but you are only setting up legal precedent to be abused by some and hurt others.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 17th, 2009Again, it’s a grey area. Ronnie gives her his pills and agrees to pay for all of her drinks, so in that sense the “power imbalance” does shift in his favour. He facilitated the whole thing. However, he seems genuinely clueless as to why she wants the pills, and Anna Faris’s character orders all the drinks herself, so I think it’s safe to say she’s just as much to blame, if not moreso.
Posted by Sean on April 17th, 2009“Now women, like Liz, want to bend those ideas to cover situations were the women VOLUNTARILY drinks or uses drunks to the point their decision making process is foggy and the man is to blame if the next morning the women feels wronged. Its a bullshit, cover our ass, feminist rhetoric.”
I’m sorry, on what planet does one person getting drunk give someone else permission to rape them? This is what we call blaming the victim, Rus. It’s bullshit, cover our ass, misogynistic rhetoric. A woman being drunk does not absolve a man of responsibility for raping her.
(You seem to be fixated on a very narrow definition of the term “date rape”, so perhaps we should use the term “rape that happens at the end of a date” instead to mean just that.)
I’m sorry that so many men have been wronged by the legal system, Rus. I think it’s despicable that people can play the system to their advantage like that in cases where rape has not occurred. But men being falsely accused of rape does not make drunk women responsible for their own rapes when an actual rape has occurred.
Sean, I’m asking if Ronnie himself is drunk, not whether or not he gave Brandi pills or who was in charge of ordering drinks for her.
Posted by Liz on April 17th, 2009As a sidenote, I found a Sexual Assault Bingo Card. For those unfamiliar with bingo cards of this kind, each squares includes a phrase or statement that often get used during a discussion on a subject as a means of diverting discussion away from the victims or blame from the guilty. Naturally, a paraphrase of “you were drunk, it’s your fault” is on there.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i281/MidnightLouise/bingo3.jpg
I’m hoping posting a singular link is enough to get me through the spam filter.
Posted by Liz on April 17th, 2009Nobody is giving men a free pass to take advantage of a passed out women Liz, but your view of date rape is to broad and leaves all of the discretion in the hands of the female. You and others have implied that if a woman, of her own free will and choosing, is using mind altering substances before and during sexual activity she is fully in her rights to claim rape after the fact. That is neither fair nor just which as at the very base of the rights you are asking for. I’m just thankful I don’t get my legal definitions off bingo cards but from the law books and legal precedents. I thankful current legal precedent doesn’t take such a liberal and man-hating view of sexual relations and substance abuse as Liz.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 17th, 2009Liz,
The thousands of serial rapists that frequent filmjunk.com are not going to “see the light” after reading your rambling, inane comments. You are wasting your time and valuable internet space.
“If a sober Rogen had got Heigl drunk in that movie (or vice versa), then we’d have a date rape debate on our hands.”
Yes, and one half of the participants would be absolute, friggin retards. Buying a girl/guy drinks does not make you a rapist if they happen to wake up the next morning and regret their decision to engage in consensual sex. Shut-up.
If a man/woman has an honest and reasonable belief that the person they intend to have sex with has consented to the intercourse, it’s not rape. HONEST and REASONABLE.
There is no such thing as a retroactive rape. You cannot wake up the next morning and say to yourself “wait-a-second self, I was sooooo drunk last night and I think we might have had sex and I don’t remember consenting.” Toatally, 100% irrelevant.
Now please. For the love of God, HUSH!
Posted by Shut-Up Ed on April 17th, 2009“You and others have implied that if a woman, of her own free will and choosing, is using mind altering substances before and during sexual activity she is fully in her rights to claim rape after the fact.”
I’ve never said that. All I’ve done is respond to the idea that somehow a drunk woman has no one to blame but herself or that she was somehow asking for it. This has nothing to do with “retroactive rape” as Shut-Up Ed so sublimely described it and everything to do with asober man making a terrible choice in the moment he decides to take advantage of a woman who does not (or cannot reasonably) consent to intercourse. I’m not nor have I ever been talking about “the morning after” for women who regret who they slept with and play the rape card. As I’ve already said in a previous comment, I think it’s reprehensible to use the legal system to your advantage like this because it persecutes innocent men.
I’m sorry that this is a “man-hating” view in your mind, Rus, because I assure you that my desire to stand up for women has nothing to do with hating men (but thanks for bringing out that golden nugget of stereotypical anti-feminist thought).
It disappoints me that there are not more women engaged in this discussion on this site, but then given how conversation has turned, I’m not surprised.
Ed, I will “HUSH” when I am good and ready and not when you’ve decided that the arguments you claim I’m making (that I’m not) are irrelevant.
Posted by Liz on April 17th, 2009“Rus. It’s bullshit, cover our ass, misogynistic rhetoric.”
you sure seemed o.k. with throwing misogynistic in my face, thanks.
“everything to do with asober man making a terrible choice in the moment he decides to take advantage of a woman who does not (or cannot reasonably) consent to intercourse.”
Liz, you are the only one talking about this scenario. We (I) have been talking about scenes in Knocked Up, Observe and Report, and drunk fucking in general the whole time. Its unfair to accuse us of misreading your back and forth definitions.
Go to go, taking a busload of school girls to see Crank 2 and need to stop at the wine shop.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 17th, 2009@ but I don’t think you should make the director seem like a bad person.
nah, dude. Lots of directors deserve to be attacked personally. Michael Bay, Terry Zwigoff, sometimes M. Night. I love Lars Von Trier, but he injects his ego into his films, so therefore it’s fair game.
Posted by Rusty James on April 17th, 2009@ It disappoints me that there are not more women engaged in this discussion on this site, but then given how conversation has turned, I’m not surprised.
There’s an unfortunate streak of hostility to women in this thread.
Rus, you object to being called a misogynist but I can’t feel much sympathy for you since you throw the censorship accusation in Liz’s face. Frankly I think her accusation has more basis, since I can’t find anywhere where Liz advocated censorship. II’ll apologize if I’m wrong, just show me the example.
I don’t go for any argument about weak willed roganites going out to date raping wantonly because they laughed at a scene in a movie.
Posted by Rusty James on April 17th, 2009But that doesn’t mean there’s not a legitimate debate to be had about the content and message of the scene in question.
Thanks, Rusty. I tried writing a semi-coherent comment but it kept devolving into inarticulate swearing.
Posted by Wintle on April 17th, 2009Wintle, I’m glad someone appreciated it. I expected to get a bunch of grief.
Posted by Rusty James on April 17th, 2009nope, I’m good.
I’m not going rehash Rusty’s censorship issue from a whole other post:
http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/04/13/observe-and-report-review/#comments
I said my piece that was brought on by a lot of strong feminist protest in various posts across the web in regards to this movie. If voicing my opinion about calls for unfair legal practices based on one of the defendants being male makes me a woman hater in your eyes, that’s your problem not mine.
I feel in the end, per Liz’s last few posts, her and I probably agree on this issue. If not, I know we agree that sexual interactions mixed with controlled substances can be really messy and each case is different.
I feel I didn’t get personal untill after I was labeled harshly.
Liz, if you do feel hurt by my comments, I’m sorry.
Filmjunk, if you do feel hurt by my comments, just wait till next time.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 17th, 2009I’m sorry Rus and Shut-up Ed but you do not seem to have a clear idea of what sexual assault/rape is. I hate to break it to you but when anyone male or female is intoxicated, they cannot consent to sex. It doesn’t matter what got them in that state, whether it was alcohol or drugs, if one of the parties is intoxicated, then they cannot consent. In many states there are laws basically reiterate this. You act as if it is only females that this law is protecting but if a man was in the same situation, he would be able to prosecute his partner for rape as well.
“How are we men supposed to define were the woman should not be trusted in her judgment!?” If a women is unconscious and vomiting (Like in the observe and report scene) it is a sign that she will not be able to make clear conscious choice about consenting.
Also “Explain this view to all of the men that have been wrongly accused, prosecuted of date rape across the world and have lost their job, standing, visitation rights to their children, etc.” Just how many men do you think this is? I’m sure you have an anecdotal example of this, but how many men does this actually happen to? It is difficult to find concrete data as there are studies that say 2% and some that say 40%. But this fact really shouldn’t add anything to the argument about date rape anyway. People are falsely accused of murder but that doesn’t mean that we don’t take murder cases seriously. We shouldn’t stop persecuting criminals just because some people are falsely accused.
We are part of a culture in which rape is the only crime where we can ask questions about the victim’s involvement. If someone was robbed we don’t say “Oh well they left their doors unlocked/ lived in a bad neighborhood, so they deserved what they got. In a society where a study on junior high school students showed that 25% of boys and 16% of girls said a man had a right to rape a woman if he spent money on the first date and 65% of boys and 47% of girls thought rape was ok if the couple had been dating for 6 months (statistics from “Gender, Race and Class In Media”), we need to understand that as a culture our views of rape need to be seriously readjusted.
And when you talk about what feminists want, you’re slightly off there too. Feminists do not want the same power that men have, they want a system and a culture that does not judge people based on their gender/sexual orientation/skin color/ ethnicity or religion. Instead they want a system that allows people to be judged on their merits with equal opportunity for everyone. They would like women to be able to go out to a bar, get drunk and not get violated by anyone, no matter how drunk she is or who she slept with before or how she is dressed that night. Men’s power is not given to them because they deserve it or because they act more responsible. Why do men automatically gain this power and authority and women have to earn it?
Posted by Jenny on April 17th, 2009If alcohol did not make women more willing to engage in sexual touchings, all bars and clubs in the entire world would be out of business.
It’s up to the judges to decide wether or not anyone was taking advantage of anything. It sucks that women feel that a scene that is clearly between two aware and willing participants is a date rape, simply because the woman is inebriated. Obviously she acknowledges the sex, and encourages it. How can you hold it against a man to do it then? It’s not like he is being violent towards her.
Posted by Henrik on April 17th, 2009And ALL directors deserve to be attacked personally. It’s art, it has to be personal.
Posted by Henrik on April 17th, 2009@ “I’m not going rehash Rusty’s censorship issue from a whole other post”
“rehash” makes it sound like you addressed it once. Last time you “responded” by giving us all a lesson in the history of censorship in a post that was as relevant as it was thoughtful and well researched.
If there’s an(1) example of Liz calling for censorship then you’re right and I’ll apologize. Otherwise you’re wrong. It’s really simple.
Posted by Rusty James on April 17th, 2009Jenny, help me because I’m obviously misinformed, tell me if I raped this girl:
Last week I ran in Stacy, we barely knew each other except for work functions, but found ourselves alone at Club Louie waiting on friends. It was odd because I felt some energy between us before and tonight, with both of us dress to the nines, the energy was really strong. I think she felt it too. Anyway, we started talking about our mutual friends and really got in to drinking and gossiping. We were separated when our perspective parities arrived, but I could tell that she was disappointed not to continue the encounter. We had dinner and during desert I thought I saw Stacy watching me from across the room. Anyway, the two parties happened to meet at the coat check a few hours later and everyone was really feeling the affects of Club Louie’s wine cellar. I almost fell over the ushers rope helping the ladies with their coats. After flagging some cabs for all of the parents in the group, geesh, Stacy and I appeared to be the only ones left. We decided to head across the street to this dance club. It was really loud and crazy. So crazy we ended up hitting on a joint with a buddy of mine in the DJs green room. Long story short, I find myself at Stacy’s at like 3 in the morning. We start messing around on the couch and I’m suprised how drunk and sloppy we are getting. I mean my face is cover with Stacy’s saliva. She leads me back to room and after falling over a stack of old vinyls I find myself grinding on a girl I never would have believed would give me the time of day 8 hours ago. We are like half naked, half dressed when Stacy says “Fuck me.” I did as best I could but it had to be some of the lousest, whisky dick sex I have ever had.
The next morning I awake to Stacy yelling at me to get F out! It was a real horror show, she was throwing stuff at me and her roommate was dialing the cops. I tried to talk to her but it became apparent I should just get out of the apartment to at least get her to stop yelling.
A few days later I realized what Stacy was yelling about during my morning hangover, “You raped me you F’in bastard!” I know this because I just received a bunch of emails from mutual friends stating that she is pressing charges.
So Jenny, is this rape?
Posted by rus in chicago on April 17th, 2009Similarly, I have a problem where my girlfriend keeps complaining that my dick is too huge and our frequent, loud, multi-orgasm inducing sex bouts leave her sore the next day. I’ve tried to deal with the problem by being gentle (set the ol’ phaser on stun) but alas the awesome power of my cock cannot be tamed.
Has anyone else had this problem? Any advice?
It reminds me of a different problem I had where my girlfriend (different girl from before) couldn’t get enough of the taste of my cum.
Posted by Rusty James on April 17th, 2009As you can imagine it became a real hassle. Your thoughts?
Can anyone tell me how the scene is?
Posted by swarez on April 18th, 2009Do they start having sex, she passes out, he doesn’t notice right away, notices, stops and asks if she’s still with him, she asks him why did he stop, he reacts by continuing.
Is that how it goes?
Cause if it is then I have no idea why people would yell out rape.
But then most of the people yelling the loudest haven’t seen the film and maybe just the 8 seconds they saw in the trailer.
You don’t see what happens from the time they get into the house and when they are in the bed. The scene starts off with them already having sex with Brandi already looking like she is passed out. Then everything else is as you described Swarez.
Posted by Pr1mal on April 18th, 2009Ok, I just saw this movie last night with my boyfriend. We both adored it. It had shades of the previously mentioned “Death to Smoochy,” as well as the Michael Douglas film “Falling Down,” which I also love. It’s an interesting set up to see people, damaged or not, being pushed to the edge of sanity by the heartless forces of their personal worlds. Those with a dark sense of humor, as well as those who have been pushed (well, maybe not THIS far) can enjoy these types of films. While Rogen’s character is disturbed, he is really trying to do what he thinks is right. He is looking for justice in what he perceives to be an unfair situation. People wanting nonsense chick-flicks-in-disguise a la “Knocked Up” will definently NOT like O&R and will be shocked at Rogen’s departure from his typical, cuddly persona.
Posted by Law on April 19th, 2009Now about the date rape scene– it wasn’t particularly funny, not because it was offensive, but simply because it’s not funny. However, if these knee-jerk reaction nutjobs actually sat through the movie, they would know that this scene actually serves an important point in the character development of both Rogen and Farris’s characters. *SPOILERS* It guides the audience to see how incredibly unhinged Rogen is, since he believes the 2 of them have made love, and is devastated when he realizes she does not really see it this way at all. It also serves to showcase Farris as a vapid, stupid attention seeking skank who goes out with Rogen after exiting a car full of men, drunkenly sleeps with Rogen, and then breaks him by sleeping with his “enemy” (DOES NO ONE RECALL THE SONG PLAYING IN HER CAR IN THE BEGINNING?). Please, do not say I’m blaming the victim or calling her character into question to lessen the accusation of rape. It wasn’t rape. I think it’s doubtful that it’s intended to show Rogen as a rapist. It shows his detachment from reality in thinking that sloppy, tequila fueled sex = love and commitment.
I love the film, but I don’t really understand how anyone can deny *the scene* is rape.
Anna Farris’s character is in and out of conscousness. She can’t walk of her own accord. I’ve known people to say all kinds of shit in that state, so waking up in the middle of sex and yelling “fucker don’t stop” doesnt make the grade for consent. Having sex with someone in that state is just wrong. At best, it’s irresponsible and ill considered.
Thematically the scene doesn’t make sense if it’s not rape. It’s about his dellussion smacking into reality. About his character mistaking this pathetic display for romance. His character has to cross a line there. A line in morality, and a line in sanity.
Posted by Rusty James on April 19th, 2009“I hate to break it to you but when anyone male or female is intoxicated, they cannot consent to sex.”
Jenny, I hate you.
You are very wrong. You may consent to any number of things when you are intoxicated. The ONLY thing that matters is the OTHER persons HONEST and REASONABLE belief that you have, in fact, consented and their reliance upon that consent.
Now please, for the love of God,
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!
Posted by Shut-Up Ed on April 20th, 2009Comments on this thread are now officially closed.
I have no interest in continuing the debate over what people think date rape is. This is a movie website, so let’s focus on movies. Thanks.
Posted by Sean on April 20th, 2009