Movie Review: I Love You Man (7/10)

When I first saw the trailer for the well-punctuated I Love You, Man, I have to admit that it piqued my interest. It had the best thing about the Apatow-ian film set (Paul Rudd and Jason Segel) without the worst things (Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill, and, well, Judd Apatow). Sort of like Forgetting Sarah Marshall, it looked like it could be a sweet, nice movie about friendship. Unfortunately, it owes more to the Apatow, then to the Segel.


The movie is about Peter Klaven (Rudd), a real estate agent trying to sell Lou Ferrigno's house, so that he can use the commission to become a big time real estate developer. Meanwhile, he is getting ready to marry Zooey (played by Rashida Jones), his sweet, but nearly personality-less, fiancé. The thing about Peter you should know, though, is that he's not like other guys. He doesn't really have any other guy friends. He has his girlfriend and he has his mom. So, in order to find a best man for his wedding, or to be more "normal" or something, he starts going on man-dates. This is the plot of the movie. For real.


Eventually, of course, he meets Sidney Fife (Segel), a free-spirit who teaches Peter how to be a real guy's guy. They drink beer, and go to Rush concerts, and talk about jerking off. You know: man stuff. But Sidney, who has his own issues as you may imagine, starts to drive a wedge between he and Zooey, and bla bla. Come on. This movie isn't about Zooey. It's about Peter and Sidney, and you know that they'll break up and get back together again. I kept imagining the pitch meeting for the movie. So it's a romantic comedy. But with two dudes. And they're not gay. They're just friends. They're bros. I would be shocked if it didn't go exactly like that.

I think I may be simultaneously giving the movie too much and not enough credit. It is genuine and full of a lot of heart. The two guys do care for each other and form a nice bond. Jason Segel, as always, is charming. Paul Rudd is awkward and non-threatening, just as the part calls for, but he unfortunately has the distinction of just not being Jason Segel. And the whole thing is funny. It's not as crude as it could have been, which I appreciated it, and it was full of plenty of great, if not totally memorable, lines.


Where the problem lies is in the subtext, while being less offensive than in some other movies, still makes it come off homophobic and misogynistic. It doesn't make gay people creepy like in Wedding Crashers, and it allows it's women a bit more a voice than, say Knocked Up, but does that count as progress? Is it okay to call it a step in the right direction for this frat guy genre of movies, and hope for the best in what's to come? (Apatow's new movie comes out in July, so we'll have to wait and see.) I don't think it really is. I think they would argue that since Peter has a gay brother (Andy Samburg), they're not discriminating. And they probably really mean that, but he's used as a joke to juxtapose Peter's masculinity (see even the gay is more of a guy than Peter), and the gay man that Peter accidentally has a real date with is ridiculous. The women don't get off any better. Jamie Pressly is hilarious as Zooey's friend, but the women are largely shown to be only interested in marriage and babies, and are told to stay quiet and away while the men do their thing.

I guess overall, what I'm trying to say, is that though the movie is funny and good, if they had just thought for a second about what they were really saying, it could have been so much better. One thing they fail to acknowledge is that you can be thoughtful and sensitive, without giving yourself over totally the gods of masculinity and ridiculousness. The movie would be full of fewer cheap laughs, but what a more interesting study into Peter Klaven that could have been.