the chart above shows a few examples of Judd Apatow's signature plot trajectory: life starts going well for the guy, things are getting really good, things get really shitty, and then they get better, usually at a wedding. Apatow keeps cantering it out, despite the fact that it each time underdelivers on what the audience wants. So here's me asking Judd Apatow to stop forcing his movies into outfits that they don't fit.
We watch Apatow's movies to laugh at ppl telling mad funny jokes. We don't come for hard thought; for that, we have Rust & Bone. Not Rogen & Boner jokes.
So why does Judd Apatow insist on forcing 15 minutes of controversy and breakups into the tail end of his films?
It's frustrating. It's like Michael Jordan sitting out the third quarter to give the fans tax advice.
i realize that there's pressure to movie-ify the stories; to fit 40 year old virgins into the molds that we're used to. but we need to know that structures are only valuable insofar as they help tell the story. the goal should never be for the story to help tell the structure.
So let's just be who we are: if we are really good at making people laugh, let's just make people laugh. Save the break-up scene for another time. Don't make the guy choose between his girlfriend and his stoner friends. Skip the dip this time.
PS some other examples:
Nathan: 40 year old. they breakup. they get back together.Victor: bridesmaids. they get mad at each other. then they get unmad at the wedding.Nathan: superbad? dont they end their friendship at each other. then come back together at the end?Victor: yea i feel like that lasts for a while too thoughVictor: forgetting sarah marshall had a pretty bad oneVictor: dude turns down his ex while theyre fooling around because he likes mila munisVictor: and she finds out that they kissed and freaks outNathan: milaK?Victor: yeaVictor: and they break upNathan: then they get back together?Victor: and then they get back together when she realizes etc