Splitsider

Tuesday, February 21st, 2012
15

Why Bridesmaids Deserved Its Best Picture Snub

Unpopular Opinions is a new weekly column in which a writer takes a stand against popular opinion, whether it's asserting the true merit of a supposedly guilty pleasure or dissenting against the universally lauded.

The inescapable hum of buzz that has surrounded Bridesmaids since the film's release peaked at the end of January, just in time for its exclusion from the Best Picture race to generate outrage in critical circles. The Atlantic decried the snub as evidence that the Academy hates broad, raunchy comedies, while director Paul Feig was quoted in the Huffington Post saying that the film was too “relatable,” a dig at the kind of artsy fare that normally garners Oscar acclaim.

The one thing that none of the film's defenders actually did, however, was take a critical look at Bridesmaids. If they had, they might have spotted the fatal flaw lurking at its core. For a movie written by women, with a cast made up of some of the funniest females on the planet, its core female characters are offensively reductive stereotypes: a rich bitch, a reactive adolescent, and the world's most passive bride.

Let's start with our protagonist, Annie (Kristen Wiig). When you start to look closely at the critical response to Bridesmaids, you can see critics actively avoiding Annie's passivity and childish behavior. She's “praised” for her realism in words that get less flattering the more you look at them. Annie is an “everywoman you can believe in,” “unfailingly interesting […], a paragon of antic energy,” and, most damningly, “a woman trying and failing to put on a mature face as she watches her dominoes fall.” She's “relatable” and an “everywoman,” but she's never strong, smart or successful. Her attempt to “put on a mature face” implies childishness, and “a paragon of antic energy” brings to mind nothing more than a kid hopped up on sugary juice. Plus, she's “interesting,” which any writer knows is a word you only use when you can't think of anything positive to say.

These reviews implicitly recognize what none of them will say outright: Annie is not so much a woman as a passive, immature girl. She spends the movie getting stepped on by everyone from her douchey fuck buddy to her strange British roommates to Helen. On the few occasions she isn't getting stepped on she's throwing a tantrum. The scene where Annie makes an ass of herself trying to one-up Helen's speech the engagement party doesn't play as funny; it's the behavior of a child who is jealous of a younger sibling, a trait that stops being acceptable well before puberty.

Annie can't even be active when standing up for herself. The moment that, unfortunately, defines her character is her attempt to win back Nathan (Chris O'Dowd). Instead of acting like an adult and addressing their issues face-to-face — which she had many opportunities to do, as evidenced by the multiple unanswered calls he makes — Annie bakes Nathan a cake. Which is a nice gesture that doesn't mean much once we see her chosen method of delivery: the doorbell ditch. Even when Annie is trying to change, she exhibits the emotional maturity of a teenage girl.

It's instructive, at this point, to compare Annie with Meghan, the film's breakout character who earned Melissa McCarthy her justly deserved Oscar nod. When Megan wants something, whether it be Air Marshall Jon or a totally impractical number of puppies, she goes after it and she gets it. Comparing Megan's bold pursuit of Jon to Annie's timid cake gesture is like following up several shots of whiskey with a white wine spritzer — they're both trying to accomplish the same thing, but one of them is considerably more upfront about it.

I'm not saying that Annie needs to be tough and action-oriented all the time. The character is supposed to be something of a mess; she lost her business and life savings, after all. The real issue here is that Annie's passivity and childish tantrums don't fit with the “before” picture we're given of a confident, talented, independent businesswoman. Annie's inability to apologize to Nathan in person or talk to Lillian about her problems makes all the talk about Cake Baby's success difficult to swallow.

Her lack of communication with her supposed best friend, however, is not entirely her fault. Annie might be a childish, passive adolescent, but Lillian's presence makes her look like a tough-minded adult. Lillian is bland and weak-willed to the point that she almost fades into the walls, which is a pretty impressive feat when the character is played by the incomparable Maya Rudolph. She spends the entire movie blindly following Helen's lead, even when it ends with her alienating Annie for the sake of a wedding. A running thread involving Lillian's father, which is supposed to be funny but comes across as sad, shows the bride spending lavishly despite his protests, much the same way she passively endorses Helen's expensive choices without stopping to think about the fact that her best friend just lost everything and probably can't afford a $600 bridesmaids dress.

Which brings us to Helen. The really frustrating thing about Helen, more frustrating than her constant need to be the center of attention and the way she bends everyone to her will, is the fact that somewhere under the mean girl mannerisms and impeccably tailored clothes, there is a really fascinating character. Helen is trapped in a marriage with a rich, neglectful man and despised by her own stepchildren. She's possessive of Lillian because she only has one friend. Helen could have an honest portrait of an isolated woman trying to make friends the only way she knows how, and failing because she doesn't understand that money isn't the same thing as generosity. That's the Helen that we see apologizing to Annie, vulnerable and crying because she knows she's only there to plan parties. Instead, we get a stereotypical rich bitch whose one real moment gets her a last-minute redemption that, given her previous behavior, feels superficial and unearned.

You might think I'm the only pouty contrarian trying to ruin Bridesmaids for everyone, but despite the overwhelmingly positive response to the movie, there are others. The Atlantic's Miriam Krule wrote an excellent piece debunking the movie's supposed feminism, in which she points out that the central conflict is based entirely on who gets to be Lillian's maid of honor. The piece might not hit on passivity of the film's leads, but Krule's analysis is otherwise spot-on. You can applaud the film's merits until you're blue in the face, but Krule's piece shows that, beneath all the talk, Bridesmaids is basically just Bride Wars 2. So keep that in mind on Oscar night, because no one wants Bride Wars 2 to win Best Picture. Even if it would be a better choice than Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.

If you have your own Unpopular Opinion you want to make a case for, send a pitch to Jesse David Fox.

Alex Israel is a graduate student at the University of Chicago. In her limited free time, she writes about television on her blog, Pencils Down, Pass the Remote.

  • WeevilWobble

    I am so sick of the sexism that is so common from this article and others like it. Slacker kings in other comedies is the norm and totally OK. Seth Rogan or Steve Carrell's growth from boys to men because of a triggering event is acceptable. But it is somehow anti-feminist for Annie to be in a similar situation. Where she is really a girl who has to figure out how to grow up.

    The central conflict of the movie is not who can be the Maid of Honor. Annie didn't even want that position to start with. And she becomes competitive because it becomes a symbol of the disintegrating relationship with one of the only steady relationships in her life. There is this whole world she isn't a part of. These adults who can afford to do things where she goes from living with roommates to her mother. And becoming more and more of a child. That isn't just a female story it is the story of so many now. So many whose business or dreams failed. Whose significant others betrayed them. Who can't seem to get out of the hole and, in reality, have stopped trying. And then something like a wedding happens and you are surrounded by people who have their lives together. And really it just makes you feel worse. It resonated with audiences because so many can relate to being in that position in life.

    The fact that the cake wasn't enough was the whole damn point. He just let it rot because it was not enough. Because even with tenative steps toward adulthood she is not doing enough. And that is why she has to make a move. She has to find her best friend because her best friend won't come to her.

    But why tell a human story when, for some reason, it is their responsibility to tell stories about impossibly strong women. Because, unlike men, women aren't allowed to show that they can be immature. That they can be weak, timid, immature. That they can become stuck. No, if we aren't strong and perfect in movies we are anti-feminist. Such complete BS and it is infuriating.

    • violetion

      @WeevilWobble WONDERFUL comment. This article is ridiculous in trying to pigeon hole women as needing to be "strong, smart and successful" in order to be proper feminists. What made Bridesmaids' characters compelling, particularly Annie's, is that they were real, as they are praised to be. They were funny and inane. They were, at times, stupid and immature. This is how people are. Why is it that male characters can be complex, intricate and flawed, but female characters can't be?

  • itsonreserve

    So….your complaint is that prior to achieving character development these characters have flaws?

    I'm going to tell you right now: I am dying to read your novel. Sounds like a fun use of time.

  • grinning

    Gosh, people are mean.

    I don't think a word you say is wrong, but its also true of Superbad, Caddy Shack, Airplane, Blazing Saddles, and every other comedy movie and tv show ever made.

    All comedy is built on archetypes. The problem isn't that Bridesmaids does the same, but so many expectations about gender were lumped on one movie.

    Bridesmaids is solid entertainment, but not earth-shaking or game-changing, and it shouldn't be expected to be.

  • Skittles

    I didn't like Bridesmaids because I'm a feminist and believe firmly in doing feminist things all the time in my feminist pants. I liked it because the characters are relatable, interesting, and funny. I seriously doubt that anyone involved was all, "Let's make a movie free from female stereotypes just like Gloria Steinem would have wanted!" They were writing comedy. And they did. And it was awesome.

    And as a person who has flipped her shit and acted like a childish asshole on several occasions, I can safely say that you can do that and still be a feminist, if you so choose.

    Did I think it deserved a Best Picture nomination? No. Best original screenplay? Yes.

  • Steve Austine@twitter

    tl;dr

  • Jon O

    Nice story, Chuck Klosterman. Is this what happens when you have to go 1000 words without footnotes?

  • swiftswork

    I, like most people here, think this opinion is unpopular for a reason. You want comedy to be as 'real' as possible, to reflect life more; but comedy doesn't work like that. Comedy is artificial so that it can create funny situations. It relates to life, but not directly like a kitchen-sink drama: when you say 'Helen could have (be?) an honest portrait of an isolated woman trying to make friends the only way she knows how, and failing because she doesn't understand that money isn't the same thing as generosity', well, we see that Helen, but an 'honest portrait', whatever that might be (art is artificial, not honest), isn't required. It isn't as funny, either, and she's not to any extent the main focus of the movie. Comedy must remain simultaneously engaged with and detached from life. Comedy contains things, refers to things, observes things, portrays things… but it's never a 'portrait' of them in such a crass, obvious way.
    We all need to allow women to be just as funny, and stupid, and pathetic, and confused as men. I'm reminded of that story in Tina Fey's 'Bossypants' where Amy Poehler, accused (albeit jokingly) of not being 'cute' while goofing around, says 'I don't care if you like it'. In that sense, Bridesmaids doesn't care if you like it. Although I definitely care about the snobbery of awards shows in relation to some of the most enduring, culturally important and carefully crafted films I've seen through the years.

  • http://www.seanandmeghan.net sean oconnor

    I have to agree with this article. But I will say, I liked the movie. But it should not have been nominated for Best Picture, it's a great movie and very fun! BUT, IT'S THE BEST PICTURE!

    The stereotypical characters are that for a reason, it's because it's a broad comedy. Which is very specifically why it wasn't nominated for Best Picture.

    AGAIN, I liked the movie.

    It was about 40 minutes too long.

    BUT I LIKED THE MOVIE! I REALLY LIKED IT.

    But, just because you like something doesn't mean it deserves things. Maybe the movie was made to be liked or loved. Sometimes you have to award films that were made to win awards.

    By the way, I really liked Bridesmaids.

  • winorhino

    I am coming at this from a man's point of view. In fact, a drunk man's point of view. First of all, I thought this movie struck a chord with me in some ways, considering that I lost my best friend to a marriage not that long ago. And while I may be immature, watching a friend that you have been close to for so long slip away because of a new-found commitment can be quite heartbreaking. And as for her outbursts regarding the other bridesmaid's one-up-manship; I found her outburst to be exactly what I was thinking. Maybe the character is more so a man acting in a woman's body, but I found her actions to be simply what I would want to do if I were in that situation. I'm stopping. I;m druk

  • ino

    What’s with all the personal attacks? This article is clearly written as a practice of devil’s advocacy. Did I like the movie? Yes. Do I think it was snubbed? No. Many of you are criticizing the article because you think it suggests that it is okay for comedies about men to follow this pattern of flawed stereotypical characters growing up but that it’s not okay for a movie about women. First of all, as far as I know, the author could have the very same feelings about comedies with men. Secondly, remember the article is about why Bridesmaids didn’t deserve a Best Picture nomination, not why the movie is not as good as its masculine counterparts (40 yr old Virgin, Superbad, Knocked Up, etc). Comparing it to these films and saying “well it was okay there!” doesn’t mean anything in the context of the article because none of those films were nominated for Best Picture either. Now, if as you commenter’s suggest similar characters and development were used in movies before with the main difference being that they were men, does this movie deserve a Best Picture nomination just because they used women? That’s tantamount to saying “Wow! Look what they accomplished using women, can you believe they could make women be funny? That deserves a prize.” This is, I assure you, as ridiculous as it sounds. If not, I’m going to start working on a drama with an all female cast centered on the politics of a shady real estate agency during the economic downturn tentatively titled Glensherry Glenn Close.

    • WeevilWobble

      @ino But the author didn't say it doesn't deserve a Oscar nom because it is a broad comedy and those never do (I personally think 40 Year Old virigin should have recieved a nomination and the lack of comedy noms is insane). She said it didn't deserve it because the main character is childish and flawed and calls the movie Bride Wars 2 (which it is not). This suggests that all themes around weddings (a traditional female field) is inherently bad. And that there is something wrong with a woman being childish and growing up as a theme. Something anti-feminist about being flawed.

      I doubt anyone would have minded if she had just said that this type of comedy doesn't get nominations. A lot of people have made that point and it is fine. But, instead, it completely focused on the fact that these women are flawed and therefore less than deserving.

  • amyfairycakes

    "You can applaud the film's merits until you're blue in the face, but Krule's piece shows that, beneath all the talk, Bridesmaids is basically just Bride Wars 2. So keep that in mind on Oscar night, because no one wants Bride Wars 2 to win Best Picture."

    This is where you lost me. That's like referring to Knocked Up as Nine Months 2 because they touch on vaguely similar topics.

  • Caitlin Podiak@twitter

    I yearn to see more funny movies by and about women. I write pointedly feminist comedy screenplays. My first spec was a girl version of Superbad. And I agree that Bridesmaids was not very good.

    I wanted it to be good. I saw it on opening night. I participated in the "everyone needs to go see Bridesmaids on opening night so that studios will greenlight more female-led comedies" hype. I'm glad it did well. But I was disappointed because it was not very good. My best friend (who is also a feminist comedy-lover, with whom I saw 40-Year-Old Virgin in theaters twice, and watched every episode of Freaks and Geeks and Undeclared, plus all the commentary tracks) agreed that it was not very good.

    The actors are all very funny and talented and good at improvising and did a great job with what they were given. But the screenplay was not well written. I've read it, and it reads like what it is: a first attempt by two funny, talented sketch comedians with no understanding of screenplay structure.

    Kristin Wiig and Annie Mumolo have readily acknowledged this fact in numerous interviews: "We didn’t know what we were doing. We bought Syd Field’s book, and then we were like, 'OK, I think on page 30, our first act has to be over…?'" "Our only experience had been writing sketches, and sketches at the Groundlings are about six pages long. So in the very first draft, Kristen said, 'OK, let's think of it as 20 sketches, so we don't get overwhelmed.'"

    Had they taken the time to study and understand screenplay structure, they might have written an Oscar-worthy screenplay. Instead, they wrote a first draft in six days, Judd Apatow threw in some poop jokes, and they punched it up with improvisation. The result was a decent vehicle for jokes with a flawed narrative, poorly developed character arcs, and undercooked theme.

  • Lauren E.

    I think most of you are missing the point of her article. It is not that this movie or others written by and featuring women comediennes are supposed to aspire to greater intellectual heights than Superbad, et al. Her issue is with the perceived slight at the film having not received an Oscar nomination. It's almost as though, simply BECAUSE the film was somewhat groundbreaking in that it was written by women, it should have been nominated on that merit.

    While Kristin Wiig delivered a great performance and there were some really funny moments in the film, for me it ultimately collapsed under the weight of the trite melodramatic plot line. Yes I understand the sentiment, but it would have been better without the drama, in my opinion.

-->