Judd Apatow's Funny People: When Penis Jokes Are Family Friendly

Peter Suderman | August 4, 2009

A short, incomplete list of things Judd Apatow loves: masturbation humor, dick jokes, and stable traditional families. In his latest film, Funny People, you'll find plenty of the first two, and a lot of yearning for the third. 

It's a funny movie, yes, though not as funny as his previous directorial efforts, Knocked Up and The 40 Year-Old Virgin. That, however, is partly by design: Unlike so many of the films in the subgenre he's associated with, the movie's not a straight comedy. Instead, it's an adult drama about the complicated lives of difficult people that happens to have a lot of humor mixed into it. In other words, it's like a James L. Brooks film, but with a lot more jokes about testicles.

Apatow's view of relationships comes off as a sort of retort to the Woody Allen approach to romance ("the heart wants what it wants"), in which love is not something that just happens, mystically and mysteriously, but instead something one works at, something one is committed to regardless of the whims of lust, desire, and romance. And in particular, Apatow seems to take a strong stance on the necessity and sanctity of the traditional, two-parent family. 

In other words, it's a broadly socially conservative worldview. That, of course, has been discussed to death, but the more interesting thing to me is how it exists in context with the over-the-top sexual and scatological humor. Family-focused social conservatives have typically been the most outspoken opponents of explicit sexual humor, but Apatow uses it to sell a vision of the world that's relatively compatible with theirs. For Apatow, gross-out humor isn't a sign of anything wicked, it's a signal of a boyish immaturity that he seems to imply is natural but unsustainable—and best cured by gently easing into the responsibilities of adulthood. 

While I'm generally not a fan of the-media-is-polluting-our-youth's-minds style outrage in any form, I do think there's a lesson here for the PTCs and other concerned social conservatives of the world who busy themselves counting—and complaining about—four letter words and exposed nipples: When it comes to culture, the important thing isn't so much what specific words are said or which images are shown as what they actually mean. 

I reviewed the vulgarity-packed Bruno here. Jesse Walker wrote about free speech and the movie business here.

Comments

|8.4.09 @ 4:16PM|#

My initial reaction to the trailer was that it looked like lots of the kind of inside-the-entertainment-biz navel-gazing that I cannot abide.

Needless to say, I haven't seen it, and don't plan to.

|8.4.09 @ 4:19PM|#

Many of the splat films of the late 70's, early 80's were socially conservative in the whole "Brothers Grimm" sense of the word.

Don't leave the beaten path and go out into the woods or you will die.
Don't engage in illicit hanky panky or you will die.

You'd think that they could sign on to a platform containing such planks.

Jeremy Lott|8.4.09 @ 4:20PM|#

Don't think the Woody Allen ref works here. The Funny People take on that would be "The heart wants what it wants, and sometimes that a really bad thing."

Jeremy Lott|8.4.09 @ 4:21PM|#

Don't think the Woody Allen reference works here. The Funny People twist would be, "The heart wants what it wants, and sometimes that's a really bad thing."

|8.4.09 @ 4:23PM|#

Am I odd for liking Apatow's work and hating pretty much anything Woody Allen has ever done?

|8.4.09 @ 4:26PM|#

See Seventh Sign and then watch Love and Death.

Be drunk.

You will think that the latter is the funniest shit you've ever seen.

|8.4.09 @ 4:28PM|#

I do think there's a lesson here for the PTCs and other concerned social conservatives of the world who busy themselves counting-and complaining about

Yeah, but if they actually made statements approving of these works, that wouldn't get people to watch them. Like how parents know that kids are going to rebel, so they want them to rebel in the basically benign, culturally reinforcing ways.

Oz|8.4.09 @ 4:28PM|#

I like some of the films he's been involved with - the ones that are actually comedies like anchorman, Talladega, step bro's etc...but knocked up, 40 year old and to some extent superbad are all chick flicks. Funny People is definitely going in the chick flick file.

Peter Suderman|8.4.09 @ 4:34PM|#

Jeremy Lott -- I don't think there's anything wrong with your reading re: Allen, but I don't think it conflicts with mine, either. Either way, it's a repudiation of Allen's whim-driven view of love, which is key in a lot of his movies.

Hugh Akston|8.4.09 @ 4:43PM|#

Am I odd for liking Apatow's work and hating pretty much anything Woody Allen has ever done?

Yes and No.

|8.4.09 @ 5:10PM|#

...Apatow seems to take a strong stance on the necessity and sanctity of the traditional, two-parent family.

I think many people in my generation (somewhere between young Gen-Xer and old millennial) don't sanctify the traditional, two-parent family so much as they simply realize it's a pretty damn good model--especially since so many of us grew up with divorced families.

I also think it's important to note there's a big difference between being a social conservative in the political sense and living a socially conservative lifestyle. I'm extremely tolerant socially and have certain interests that wouldn't be considered socially conservative (brewing, and drinking, lots of beer and listening to--and at one time playing--loud and vulgar music come to mind) but I'm also a church-going father and husband with a white-collar job. Maybe Apatow is reaching out to the me's of the world (which is somewhat ironic since I generally find his movies amusing but nothing I would actually see at the theater or purchase on dvd).

|8.4.09 @ 5:14PM|#

When it comes to culture, the important thing isn't so much what specific words are said or which images are shown as what they actually mean.

Who determines what works of culture "actually" mean? And in movies, what is it besides the specific words and the images that provide the meaning?

|8.4.09 @ 5:23PM|#

Judd: (Looking back at Woody) You don't think my films are working?

Woody: A film, I think, is - is like a shark, you know? It has to constantly move forward or it dies.
(He sighs)
And I think what we got on our hands
(Clearing his throat)
is a big, floppy dildo.

|8.4.09 @ 5:29PM|#

Apatow is utterly overrated. Maybe I find his work so boring specifically because of the socially conservative overtones; I like my humor to be offensive and shocking, and penis jokes are like whoopie cushions; I mean, come on--they're not even remotely shocking any more.

South Park, Always Sunny, Strangers With Candy: those are some humorists that know how to offend people.

|8.4.09 @ 5:51PM|#

I thought Knocked Up was terrible. First, the Seth Rogan character never gets into the bar to meet Katherine Hagan. Second, Hagen never gives him the time of day let alone sleeps with him. So the whole movie was based on a completely stupid premise. The sister character was a complete annoying shrew. The classic hot bitch who got married and had kids yet still thinks she is the hottest girl in high school. I go to movies to see compelling and interesting characters. And if I can't have that, at least have them be glamorous and good looking. Knocked up was a collection of the types of people who are the reason why you don't go to high school reunions.

Allen is a bit like Michael Jackson in that his freak show private life and collection of bad or forgettable work has obscured his original brilliance. I don't care what anyone says, Annie Hall, Manhattan, and Hannah and Her Sisters are as good as any three movies any American director has ever made. And his early stuff like Love and Death and Sleeper and Take the Money and Run, while not "great" is funny as hell.

Jeremy Lott|8.4.09 @ 7:17PM|#

Peter,

Mea culpa.

Best, Jeremy

Anonymous|8.4.09 @ 7:57PM|#

The Filthy Critic wrote about "Funny People":

What I dreaded just from the title Funny People is this: that the name would be some attempt at irony, that while the title was Funny People it was actually about people who were all sad and torn up inside. The crying-on-the-inside kind of clown. The obviousness of the tortured soul, artiste trope. Turns out, that's what it is. It's an insular, self-absorbed, schmaltzy attempt at "serious" moviemaking. It's also as messy as the bedsheets after Grandma rolls over on her colostomy bag.

[...]

Funny People is someone trying to capture a part of his own life. Maybe it's Apatow's early days when he used to travel around with and open for Garry Shandling. Maybe it's Sandler and Apatow reminiscing about when they were roommates before they made the big time. Whatever it is, it they aren't nearly as interesting, original or profound as they think they are. They are just comics who tell dick jokes. Dick jokes are what they do best. And if they don't want to tell dick jokes, or have run out of good ones, maybe it's time to get off the stage. Two Fingers for Funny People.

JB|8.5.09 @ 1:39AM|#

First, the Seth Rogan character never gets into the bar to meet Katherine Hagan. Second, Hagen never gives him the time of day let alone sleeps with him.

So not true. I've seen plenty of girls hotter than Katherine Heigl hooking up and dating guys a lot uglier than Seth Rogen.

Abdul|8.5.09 @ 2:28AM|#

there's a big difference between being a social conservative in the political sense and living a socially conservative lifestyle

I've met a few gay couples who have one parent staying home to do child care while the other works come to the conclusion that social conservatives aren't so stupid to look fondly upon the Eisenhower-era lifestyle, and the baby boomer rejection of stable families might have been wrong about seeing the point of life as being the fulfilment of every sexual whim.

green mamba|8.5.09 @ 5:46AM|#

Funny People looks like annoying shite, which is what Knocked Up was. The Filthy Critic's review sounds pretty convincing.

40 Year Old Virgin was funny, but mostly because of Steve Carrell.

|8.5.09 @ 9:38AM|#

I've met a few gay couples who have one parent staying home to do child care while the other works come to the conclusion that social conservatives aren't so stupid to look fondly upon the Eisenhower-era lifestyle, and the baby boomer rejection of stable families might have been wrong about seeing the point of life as being the fulfilment of every sexual whim.

Those people aren't gay.

John|8.6.09 @ 12:38AM|#

I like Leslie Mann and all, but Apatow's promotion of his family has now officially become obnoxious. First, this whole movie was like a love letter to Apatow's wife (C'mon guys, she was just a small-time actress, but ain't she great? She coulda been something!) Yes, Judd, we know, you're the dorky regular-looking funny guy who scored the hot chick. Let's move on. In the olden days, she was like Hitchcock's daughter, with a small role in every Apatow production (See Virgin, Knocked Up, Drillbit Taylor) -- now she's suddenly Mia Farrow. Second, Apatow's kids are in now the mix, and are given a lot of dialogue. We even get to watch Apatow's daughter sing "Memories" for like three minutes (she was good, I admit). Take it down a notch, Judd.