I think my favorite post of Sadie's is her Because, Um...? post. Because it's true. I have been a romantic comedy fan from way, way back. Mostly because I'm a big wuss who really does love a happy ending. This is my reason for also loving action films, and one of the reasons I have for disliking westerns. And yet, the romantic comedy has begun to wear thin, for the reason Sadie highlighted. Too many of the romantic comedies I have seen - movies that are purportedly chick flicks, mind you - employ the Because, Um...? girl. A lot don't; I can definitely see why Sally ends up with Harry, and why almost every woman ends up with Hugh Grant across his multitude of films. It's because even though Harry and every guy Hugh Grant has played recently are assholes, they've got some redeeming quality - even if that redeeming quality, in Hugh's case, is simply being as cute and charming as Hugh Grant. But too many romantic comedies end with me scratching my head thinking, "Why is she interested in him?" Movies like 29 Dresses; movies like Knocked Up; even movies like Juno (seriously, Juno says Paulie Bleeker is the coolest person she knows, and all I can think is that Juno needs to meet some more people). The Because, Um...? phenomenon is incredibly annoying, and I'm glad it has been named.
I liked her other posts as well, though I took some umbrage at the maligning of a puppet Dracula musical throughout the Forgetting Sarah Marshall post. But that's really because I'm a big fan of puppets, musicals, and vampires, and because I could totally see Joss Whedon being able to pull off a Dracula puppet musical about eternal love and having it be edgy and cool and artistic and fun.
Really, though, Sadie does a great job pointing out why these films make me so incredibly, Hulkishly, angry. It's because the films are based on the belief that sex is cool but girls are not; that the vagina is a thing to be pursued, and that the woman who that vagina belongs to is pretty much worthless. It is because the bromance aspect of Apatow's movies directly correlates to an inability to form actual romances with women. I'm actually a huge fan of the idea of a bromance; my favorite bromance writer is Aaron Sorkin, and part of why I love his work so much is the deep, passionate, platonic love many of his sets of male characters hold for one another. But the Apatow bromance is damaging, because it too often keeps the bros of the 'mance in an enforced childish state. There is no encouragement of growth within these bromances; the bromances exist in part as a way of preserving the legitimacy of the man-child life, as a way of insulating themselves from the corrupting influences of those women who want actual partners to share in the joys and responsibilities of domesticity.