This is the flick I wrote about recently, the marketing campaign for which has a big NO BOYS ALLOWED sign all over it. And you know what? Maybe that’s a good thing. Because it appears that this will only reinforce the notion that a single woman of increasing age must be in want of a husband above all else.
Yeah, I think you are right. As tiresome as the “In A World / Now / One Man blah blah blah” endlessly repeated theme has become.
Could “Austenland” be any worse than “We’re the Millers?” No one, male or female, should be allowed to see that dreck. Is it really that difficult for screenwriters to imagine a female character who is NOT a stripper (or prostitute)?
But more seriously, I don’t think much of this marketing campaign. And I absolutely detest the conventional wisdom in some quarters (and even among some film critics) that there is, or should be, such a thing as “chick flicks” which inherently repel all men. The converse isn’t that there are “dick flicks” but just movies, maybe date movies, and then those unmentionable films that have cooties.
Maybe somebody, somewhere thought that the marketing campaign for “Austenland” was a snarky rejoinder to the “chick flick” nonsense, but it ultimately seems to be buying into the nonsense, not rejecting it.
Actually, it’s a potentially fun satire on costuming and pseudo-reality shows taking over real life.
This trailer certainly makes it look like a welcome relief for people who found The Heat too challenging.
The reviews of this I’ve seen so far seem to suggest that this is another “You need a man to be complete” warning to women.
Ummm, a whole world (with a real budget and business plan) revolving around catering to a woman’s fantasy? Regardless of the fantasy and cute guys aside, that sort of kowtowing is very seductive. Add in the plucky heroine bucking the pre-set socio-economic hierarchy in pursuit of her goals — this could be a hilarious rom-com.