I Love You, Man (DVD)

Connect to Facebook/Twitter, recommend via email and much more.

---

Before I had a chance to watch the 2009 comedy "I Love You, Man," a good friend and fellow reviewer, David Vaughn, asked me if I'd seen it yet. He said he and his wife had attempted to watch it the night before but turned it off after twenty minutes or so. They didn't find it funny, and they had had enough of the constant profanities and vulgarities. I hope his observation didn't influence my opinion of the film, and I hope the reader doesn't perceive me either as a prude in bringing this up or as one who doesn't get around much; but David's comment made me consider something I've long wondered. Namely, do Hollywood filmmakers live on another planet? Certainly, like most authors and artists, filmmakers exaggerate things in their work, but do ordinary people in real life actually talk and behave as crudely as they do in so many movies today? Even if "I Love You, Man" is poking fun at some people's coarse language and behavior, the fact is, I'd guess there's enough of it in this film to turn off a sizable audience. No, I didn't dislike "I Love You, Man" as much as David and his wife seemed to, but the movie did make me question how much of its sexual hyperbole moviegoers take for granted as being normal and commonplace, when it probably isn't.

OK, filmmakers don't usually intend comedies as serious reflections of real life; I understand that. Comedies magnify events into humorous situations. Yet some movies, like "I Love You, Man," maintain a healthy foothold in reality, for all their jesting; they aren't entirely farces, and it is the closeness to one's own personal life that often makes them all the funnier. Which is why I'm dubious about such a comedy as "I Love You, Man" needing to rely so heavily on bathroom humor and obscene language to get a laugh. I mean, even Richard Pryor and George Carlin, after they'd paved the way for anticensorship, toned down their acts toward the end, realizing they'd made their point. Would "I Love You, Man" have been as humorous had the filmmakers toned down their act? The film did pretty well at the box office, but would it have done even better with a little less objectionable material in it? I don't know. Maybe I'm simply risking being labeled as "not getting it" by mentioning these things at all. I'll take my chances.

Anyway, as a comedy, "I Love You, Man" takes a somewhat different approach to love and romance than most comedies or romantic comedies. It isn't about a guy and a girl or even a gay couple. It's about male friendship and bonding; it's about what it means to have and be a best friend. The movie's main character is Peter Klaven (Paul Rudd), a quiet, straightlaced Realtor engaged to a beautiful woman named Zooey (Rashida Jones). Peter has been a loner most of his life, and what friends he's had since high school have mainly been women. Now, he suddenly realizes he has no one to ask to be the best man at his wedding. Because this bothers him, he goes to his younger brother, Robbie (Andy Samberg), a single gay man, for advice. Robbie suggests his brother find a best friend by going on a series of "man dates"; you know, find somebody to hang out and become buddies with. Even though Peter's marriage is not far off, he decides to give it a shot. Of course, it would have been simpler for Peter just to ask his brother to be his best man, but then we wouldn't have had a movie.

After a few quick, unsuccessful meetings with various flakes, Peter encounters Sydney Fife (Jason Segel), a part-time investment counselor and full-time smart-ass slacker. Sydney is basically a thirty-year-old kid, exemplified by his child's playpen disguised as a bachelor's den, complete with a drum set, musical instruments, multiple televisions, stereo, overstuffed comfy chairs, autographed celebrity pictures, girlie magazines, drug paraphernalia, etc. Sydney seems determined to remain single and play the field, flirting with every girl he meets and bragging about his sexual conquests. Peter finds Sydney's openness and apparent knowledge of human nature refreshing, and for reasons known only to scriptwriters Larry Levin and John Hamburg (the latter also directing the film as well as directing "Along Came Polly" and co-writing "Zoolander" and "Meet the Parents"), the two men hit it off. This is undoubtedly the hardest part of the comedy to accept, that two guys so entirely different as the naive, sober-minded Peter and the infantile, free-spirited Sydney would find anything in common. But clearly they do. Peter enjoys Sydney's frank, liberated demeanor; and Sydney enjoys Peter's innocuous companionship. Think of Steve Carell and Will Ferrell in these roles, and you'll get the idea. Unfortunately, the two men's relationship is so preposterously blown out of proportion, any insights the film might have provided into male friendships go out the window in favor of a few irreverent chuckles.

You can see the complications and their resolution coming a mile away. Sydney winds up bringing out the innermost and usually very worst traits in Peter, and Peter's fiancée begins to question whether she should be marrying the immature dolt who is now so unlike the temperate guy she fell in love with.