"Knocked Up" Deleted Scene about BBM!

[serious crayons]

It was meant to be funny and way and over the top.  It was never meant to be taken seriously.  In fact, yes, it's a little too over the top (but brilliant!) and therefore I can see why the scene was cut.

Exactly!  I haven't seen "Knocked Up," but this seems off-topic. It probably works better as a YouTube video than it would as a movie scene. In fact, maybe it's actually strategically placed advertising.

ANd NO st8 guy would ever admit that his bud stuck his dick in his mouth, even if true. That bit of script writing is an example of Hollywood wishful thinking. It does not reflect reality in mainstream America.

That's the point, though -- not only would no str8 guy ever say that, very few str8 guys would say ANY of that! It's satirizing the opposite, but equally ridiculous, way str8 guys DO react to BBM.

[bbm_stitchbuffyfan]

I didn't get it. What is the writer saying with this scene?

By the way, though, I am really anxious to see this movie. I have to go sometime, since it's released.

[mvansand76]

       OMG that was so funny...I wonder what Heath and Jake would think of it though....very funny. 

LOL! I think they were thinking exactly this:

"Phew....Thank God Ang didn't decide to turn it into an X-rated movie at the last minute...and us not having read the fine print in our contracts that said we have to do everything Ang says, even if he turns it into an X-rated movie...."

[serious crayons]

I didn't get it. What is the writer saying with this scene?

By the way, though, I am really anxious to see this movie. I have to go sometime, since it's released.

Well, you could probably interpret it different ways. But I think the writer is making fun of the way straight men usually act about BBM, like it's horrible to have to watch even what gay sex there IS in it, and that the only consolation is glimpsing Ann Hathaway's breasts.

Mainly, as I see it, it's just being silly and fooling around with the idea that very few straight men would react the way that guy does.

BTW, I saw the movie yesterday and thought it was pretty funny and cute. I wished this scene had been in it, though I guess it would have been kind of OT.

[ednbarby]

I'm in a vast minority, I guess, in that I didn't like this movie much at all.  (I like the deleted scene, though.  Go figure.)  I found it very misogynistic - the women were portrayed as hysterical, hormonal bitches, and the men, while certainly flawed, were portrayed as being the voices of reason.  I wouldn't want to live (or even be friends) with either of the two leading women.  I found them annoying as hell.  Take, for example, the way the one overreacted to finding out what her adorable husband (Paul Rudd - yummy) was hiding from her.  Most of us would be relieved to learn it wasn't what we most feared and in fact was something pretty innocuous.  But she flies into a rage.  I don't know - I guess I just don't like Judd Apatow's "humor" overall.  I didn't think The 40-Year-Old Virgin was funny, either.  At all.  It was on one of the premium channels one night, and I couldn't get past the first 15 minutes of it.  I only went to see this one because my local paper gave it 4 stars (out of 4).  I'd give it 2 1/2 at best.  But then, I'm just a hysterical, hormonal bitch. 

[serious crayons]

I'm in a vast minority, I guess, in that I didn't like this movie much at all.  (I like the deleted scene, though.  Go figure.)  I found it very misogynistic - the women were portrayed as hysterical, hormonal bitches, and the men, while certainly flawed, were portrayed as being the voices of reason.  I wouldn't want to live (or even be friends) with either of the two leading women.  I found them annoying as hell. 

That's interesting! I wasn't crazy about the sister, either. And who could be mad at Paul Rudd? But I thought the main woman (I can't remember her name) was cute and nice -- amazingly easygoing and open-minded. She manages to find qualities to love in a crude, not-hot, unambitious, almost-broke guy, smiles patiently when he does stupid things, tolerates his obnoxious friends, etc. Of course, there's something of the "According to Jim" beautiful woman with schlubby guy syndrome to it. But somehow watching it I wasn't as bothered by that as I often am. I was surprised they managed to make the guy likeable by the end.

[ednbarby]

That's interesting! I wasn't crazy about the sister, either. And who could be mad at Paul Rudd? But I thought the main woman (I can't remember her name) was cute and nice -- amazingly easygoing and open-minded. She manages to find qualities to love in a crude, not-hot, unambitious, almost-broke guy, smiles patiently when he does stupid things, tolerates his obnoxious friends, etc. Of course, there's something of the "According to Jim" beautiful woman with schlubby guy syndrome to it. But somehow watching it I wasn't as bothered by that as I often am. I was surprised they managed to make the guy likeable by the end.

That's true.  But that whole scene where she made him get out of the car because he sided with Paul Rudd's character made her out to seem like a hormonal bitch.  I know we're overly emotional when we're pregnant, but we're generally not completely irrational.

I think the main problem is that I went into it with elevated expectations because of the four-star rating and all the great reviews (none of which I read beforehand, and when I read them now, I'm like "Hunh?").  That'll teach me to not live by my mantra of always keeping my expectations low.

[Meryl]

I haven't seen "Knocked Up" yet, but I watched "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" on cable recently.  There was lots of crude, explicit language and some depressing attitudes toward women, but in the end I thought it did justice to the real insecurities and longings of people without belittling them too much.  The few episodes of "Freaks and Geeks" I saw also convince me that Judd Apatow has something real to say about the average Joes of the world.

As to the women being hysterical and the men the voice of reason, it sounds like a comic device that the story was built around.  There are plenty of shows out there where the roles are reversed.

Four stars, though?  I'm with Barb in thinking that was probably over the top.  And you just know that critic didn't give BBM the same distinction. 

[ednbarby]

I... I can't get this line in particular outta my head:  "Gyllenhaal's mouth is practically watering the whole fucking time.  Shove something in there!"

On rewatching - I think that the character in the scene really is gay, so it's not a matter of "No straight guy would admit to" what he admits to - it's a matter of he really likes watching guys get it on because he'd like to do that himself.

I do like how it spins the typical homophobic "jokes" on their ears very much, indeed, though. 

[ednbarby]

Well, fortunately it was deleted, so Jake won't have to deal with it on a "mass" level anyway.

I agree with you about the MTV Video Awards and the Espys - I've never forgiven Lance for telling that joke, and I honestly had a hard time forgiving Jake for finding it funny and allowing them to use it in such a notoriously homophobic venue (if what Lance said he said about it - that he "loved" it - really was true).

This didn't seem nearly as mean-spirited to me as those jokes did - I thought this was more about the character wanting to see some real action between the two of them because he was turned on by it and about making fun of people who refuse to see the movie because they think these very kinds of things will be in it, or the people like the guy who stomped out of one of my screenings of it at the beginning of the Siesta Motel scene because he couldn't even stand the sight of two men being tender in bed together after the (unshown) fact.

I guess the "Gyllenhaal's mouth was practically watering" line struck me as funny because it really wasn't true, and it was really more a reflection on the guy who was saying it instead.

Maybe that's just me