« Poseidon Suffers Another Loss | Main | Another Self-Immolation »

July 14, 2006

Prada Love

Fox, very cleverly, got USA Today to a story on men who LOVE The Devil Wears Prada.

My MCN headline is: Fox Spins: Men Without Penises & Men Who Love Penises LOVE Prada

Am I being too unkind... or not unkind enough?

Posted by poland at July 14, 2006 10:26 AM

Comments

What do you mean by "men without penises"?

Posted by: Wrecktum [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 10:32 AM

This buys into the "only fags care about Broadway" mind-set. There are plenty of straight guys (yours truly being one of them) who'd rather watch a smart, sophisticated comedy than endure two hours of explosions and/or farting and/or disemboweled teenagers. I haven't seen PRADA yet, but I certainly intend to, and I'm glad it's defying the odds and doing so well.

Posted by: Cadavra [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 10:37 AM

Dave, Dave, Dave...we know you're a good liberal, but every time you bring up anything to do with gay men, you really put your foot in your mouth.

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 10:52 AM

...that's not a foot.

I kid!

Posted by: Alan Cerny [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 12:04 PM

well Cadavra since I like the Three Stooges I might slightly cross over into the realm of immature sight gags and body humor (the polite way of saying f--t), but yes I would hope that more people boycott stupid bland "high production value" movies for intelligent stuff. Prada isn't the best thing I've seen BUT it is a damn sight better than Fantastic four and every other dumb thing released in the last 12 months.

It is kind of silly to think a male must not have a sac if he wants to see a movie sans explosions.

Speaking of Intelligent movies...I found more people, some of whom do programming at theaters, who really liked Lost skeleton of Cadavra. Bring it back to the theatres I say! And this is not an earth-joke.

Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 12:51 PM

I enjoyed Prada and am straight. Do I have to question that now since I liked it?

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 12:55 PM

No, you likely just don't have a penis. Don't worry, I mean, those things just get in the way half the time anyways.

Posted by: Tofu [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 01:04 PM

OK. Thanks Tofu. I feel better now. No kidding, one less thing to worry about.

Posted by: Stella's Boy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 01:07 PM

Men without penises will love YOU, ME AND DUPREE.

Posted by: Jeremy Smith [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 01:07 PM

Men without penises will hate SNAKES ON A PLANE.

Far too many phallic objects around, reminding them of days past.

Posted by: Tofu [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 01:09 PM

Again, this seems like you're majorly dissing people who don't agree with your opinion of the film, instead of respecting their take. A lot of men like the movie...so you verbally castrate them? Mature.

Posted by: James Leer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 01:45 PM

I'm a gay man, and I didn't like the headline. It's reductive, and comes too close to something like "cocksuckers like Prada" for a cheap laugh. I think that I'm more than whatever sexual impulses I have. I even think being gay means more than that.

Posted by: BostonGuy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 02:24 PM

Funny, Mr. Poland, I think you know how you sound because otherwise why call attention to it in your blog.

Posted by: palmtree [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 02:30 PM

Well, I asked because I was curious.

I think there is a lot of serious response to what is obviously a silly headline... and a silly story.

And Cad, I have the same feelings you do about a quality comedy that is seen as a "chick flick." A good one. Absolutely.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:15 PM

And BG, I don't know a gay man who hasn't pointed out before I could that this is a movie for which gay men are a primary audience... which is also in the story we linked to.

P.C. will out.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:18 PM

You were doing so well until that last line.

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:20 PM

And... it's gone.

"Fox Spins: Men LOVE Prada"

Posted by: Goulet [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:24 PM

I don't put headlines up just to irritate people... even if I think they are being overly sensitive.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:25 PM

I still don't know what 'men without penises' means unless it really is as obvious as James Leer suggested.

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:29 PM

Gee... did it really seem literal to you? Or intentionally harsh?

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:55 PM

It mostly just seemed confusing.

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 03:56 PM

I appreciate the change, Mr. Poland, even if I'm being overly sensitive (but we won't go there, will we?). - BG

P.S. That was a joke.

Posted by: BostonGuy [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 04:15 PM

'Men without penises' refers to an effeminate male, regardless of sexuality.

Posted by: mysteryperfecta [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 04:28 PM

So it was as lame of a joke as we were thinking. But like I said on the other post, somehow it's hard to get angry with Poland about making fun of effeminate men after seeing that webcast thing...

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 04:41 PM

Actually, back in the day, "men without penises" is what some scientists thought women were.

Posted by: Blackcloud [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 04:52 PM

Keep selling that joke, Jeff... someone will laugh someday.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 04:56 PM

So you can dish it but you can't take it?

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 05:05 PM

I take it well when it is smart or it is funny (see Eric)...

And who have I ever dished that kind of comment out to anyway? "Drama queen" is not a comment about anyone's sexuality, but rather a tone of sensitivity. So... please tell me...

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 05:17 PM

"I take it well when it is smart or it is funny"

then we are indeed even.

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 05:18 PM

Lota: I adore The Three Stooges. But they got their laughs the old-fashioned way--with clever lines and rigorously timed slapstick and visual gags. The problem with comedies today is that they just throw bodily-function gags out there without any justification for doing so. I have no objection to farting if there's a solid reason for it (e.g., the "silent running" sequence in DOWN PERISCOPE), but too often it's just lazily inserted for a quick, cheap laugh.

Thanks for the kudos on LOST SKELETON. It's still available to any theatre that wants to play it, so contact your local emporium and request it.

Posted by: Cadavra [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 14, 2006 11:14 PM

Anything that gives this movie publicity is fine by me. I really wanna see it cross $100mil.

Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0 [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 15, 2006 12:47 AM

So Dave, if a man likes something that a woman might like, he must be either gay or castrated? I have to say that I find your comment **amazingly** sexist. I am really disappointed to learn that you think this way.

Posted by: Sultry [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 01:41 AM

Of course, using the word "castrated" takes the light-hearted comment to an absurd level.

Not a single person, gay or straight, with an interest in the film didn't point out that one of the major audiences would be gay men. That's not even a question mark.

That story was, basically, an argument that straight men LOVE the movie too.

Some do. The list seems to me to be very, very, very short.

And it's not because straight men cannot love a comedy about a woman overcoming adversity in the fashion world. It's because of the weaknesses of this specific movie, which women and gay men (and please understand this is a broad comment, not an effort to define gay america) seem to forgive, showing more appreciation for the catty villain and the fashion show of the film than Regular Joe men do.

Had the movie achieved what I think it aspired to, there is no reason why straight men wouldn't like it more... still resistant in many quarters... but more... as a movie that works.

To me, the level of sexism here is about equal to noticing that young girls like certain kinds of horror movies, teen boys like a different breed, and across the board hits have a different tone altogether. There are also movies that black people like more than white people, that Middle America likes more than the coasts, and that are sold aggressively to the spanish-speaking population and not caucasian and black america.

If noticing these things makes me a sexist, racist or ethnicist, I can't fight that. If joking about it is a crime, I think we are lost.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 12:00 PM

The premise of the article was that men would like it because they can relate to the stresses of that kind of job and that kind of boss. And that I do and did.

And another key reason it works for me: it wasn't a fairy tale about her meeting the perfect guy who would sweep her off her feet. It was about her staying true to herself, which is a much more universal theme. I seriously doubt Prada would be doing what it is without the geniune support of straight men (some of whom are dragged by their lady friends but still, that didn't mean they didn't like it).

Posted by: palmtree [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 12:11 PM

I don't think anyone's arguing with you, DP, about the actual facts of the matter. I think the issue people have raised has more to do with your seeming derision, which it seems was certainly not intentional, but was still felt.

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 01:03 PM

Dave, you can't dedicate an entire blog entry to whether you've gone too far (which to me, indicates that you suspected you may have) and then attack the people who answer in the affirmative. What's the point of this then?

Posted by: James Leer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 02:08 PM

How you do read "attack," JL?

I do think that saying that the headline suggested castration was a bit much by half. But aside from calling that "absurd," how am I attacking... as opposed to offering my opinion?

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 03:05 PM

Your opinion on the movie is one thing, but you are insulting the people who have a different opinion and questioning their manhood. That's something totally different and uncalled for, especially since most of your male readers on this blog who saw Prada liked it. Perhaps you'd like to clarify what you meant, if that's not the case?

Posted by: James Leer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 09:25 PM

"Most of your male readers on this blog who saw Prada liked it."

Was there a study I didn't read?

Again, this "questioning their manhood" and castration stuff... good lord, man.

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 10:41 PM

Why did you even set up this blog entry, dude?

Posted by: James Leer [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 10:52 PM

There is a difference between questioning how something will be taken - the purpose - and even considering writing something that would question people's manhood or suggest castration.

I know you're gay because I saw you make a spinach dip in a loaf of sourdough bread once.


Castrating?

(I like spinach dip, btw. Bread bowls, not so much.)

Posted by: David Poland [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 16, 2006 11:20 PM

DP, it is possible that your sense of humor is too subtle for the room.

Posted by: jeffmcm [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 17, 2006 01:35 AM

Mr. Poland, perhaps these comments are best left for your vlog. Btw, when's the next one?

Posted by: palmtree [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 17, 2006 09:23 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?