“Bromantic Comedies” are Great Examples of Post-patriarchal Hollywood Cinema - Discuss

“Bromantic Comedies” are great examples of post-patriarchal Hollywood cinema. With close reference to no more than two case study films from 2004 onwards, examine this statement.

During a study of American men in 1998, it was concluded, “male to male affection was considered socially appropriate only in contexts that were emotionally charged in some way (wedding, graduation, and funeral)” (Morman, M. Floyd, K, 2011: 878). This problematic masculine expectation has been instilled into society for many years and continued to control male emotions and actions up until this point. All institutions and platforms were subject to this ideal, such as the workplace, education and the media, including Hollywood Cinema. Constantly reacting to social and political issues, Hollywood’s influences were taken from situations happening at the time, often patriarchal. Hollywood interjected these harmful male representations throughout many years of filmmaking and releasing. Working up to the shift of masculine presentation that occurred in the early twenty-first century, Hollywood had presented masculine archetypes as hard-bodied, aggressive and violent.

Amid possibly one of the most reactionary eras in America and Hollywood, Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980. With Reagan’s election came a culture of greed, materialism and ‘macho’ men, something Hollywood cinema mirrored. Although there was a vast amount of inconsistency during this period, women were outlined as crazy and psychotic with films such as Fatal Attraction, while men were being shown as avatars for neo-conservative policies and often killers or rapists, seen in many slasher films of the era. The 1990s brought a different kind of masculinity, the sensitive man, and Hollywood aligned itself with this emergence. These films offered audiences to consider men as nurturing partners and featured a more diverse masculinity. Likewise, radical changes supported by the feminist movement also emerged, with an increase in women working. From this point, “masculinity [was] no longer simply an essence or an issue of what you do, it’s how you look” (Edwards, T. 1997: 55). During the latter part of the twentieth century, Hollywood engaged with New Lad culture including films such as Scary Movie and American Pie. These films highlighted the prototypical male pastimes of drinking, watching football and engaging with sexual intercourse, alongside presenting women as objects to male disposal. All of these portrayals of men continued into the twenty-first century throughout many Hollywood films, until, interestingly, less than a decade later, when a shift in masculinity occurred with introduction of Bromantic Comedies.

Bromantic comedies deviated away from any kind of male presentation proposed before it. At a point in history where homosexuality began to be openly discussed, and feminism somewhat peaked, American masculinity started to be reconstructed. A Bromantic comedy, as defined by John Alberti, is a contemporary subgenre that is “ostensible romantic comedies centred on confused homosocial/homoerotic relationships between putatively straight male characters.” (2013: 159). In other words, the bromantic comedy is a renegotiated version of the well-recognised romantic comedy, and finds humour in reversing that formula. Likewise, the term bromantic is a portmanteau of bro(ther) and romance (Hartwell, D, B. 2013: 2), highlighting the strong, brother-like, platonic relationship the male characters uphold in these films. However, despite bromantic comedies suggesting a post-patriarchal Hollywood cinema, there are still films and representations that continue to withstand patriarchal values. By examining two case study films from the early 2000s, this essay will investigate whether bromantic comedies eliminate patriarchy in their films, or whether they still instil some patriarchal tropes. The two successful Hollywood bromantic comedies that have been chosen to discuss in relation to defining or defying post-patriarchy Hollywood are Step Brothers (McKay, A. 2008) and 21 Jump Street (Lord, P. Miller, C. 2012). Both of these films can be categorised as bromantic comedies with their illustration of bromantic relationships through a comedic lens.

With patriarchy having a range of definitions, the definition that will be used throughout this discussion is one proposed by Carol Christ (2016):

“Patriarchy is a system of male dominance, rooted in the ethos of war which legitimates violence, sanctified by religious symbols, in which men dominate women through the control of female sexuality, with the intent of passing property to male heirs, and in which men who are heroes of war are told to kill men, and are permitted to rape women, to seize land and treasures, to exploit resources, and to own or otherwise dominate conquered people.”

This definition has been specifically chosen amongst others because most of those definitions found do not consider the complexity of elements that bond together to maintain a system of patriarchy.

A key trope that bromantic comedies present is expressions of male intimacy. The films display something other than straight male behaviour, while still insisting that the actions cannot be misinterpreted as anything other than close male friendships. Step Brothers toys on this idea when Brennan (Will Ferrell) and Dale (John C. Reilly) meet properly for the first time during a family dinner. Dale sings a grotesque song in an attempt to irritate Brennan, but the context of the song suggests further. “If you want to get down on these hairy balls, why don’t you jump right in? It’s a crotch party right up in here!” (9:40) The situation Dale is asking of Brennan displays not only how immature he is, but also implies a deeper homosexual desire. Other instances would include the frequent use of the word “fagg*t” during the film, and the two men being accused as “bum buddies” by a group of school children (44:30). Another occasion would include when Brennan asks Dale “If you were a chick, who is the one guy you would sleep with?” (35:18), to which they simultaneously answer the same man. Similarly, 21 Jump Street has countless references to homosexuality, mostly through jokes and comedy. For example, the scene when the two lead characters pretend one of them is giving the other oral sex while undercover on a job. Being an excerpt of another sub-genre alongside bromantic comedy, 21 Jump Street can also be classified as a Buddy Film. Buddy cop films often have a queer subtext amongst their central male characters, a theme 21 Jump Street does not stray away from. Bromantic comedies can be seen as a progress from the patriarchy within the buddy film and a “reflection of [current] American social attitudes” (Handy, B. 2012). However, to state full progress would perhaps be an overstatement. Despite these films addressing homosexuality fairly directly, these representations are for comedic value and therefore are not definite. Bromantic comedies, to an extent, do offer a normalisation of homosexuality in Hollywood cinema, but celebrates this in an ironically, quite homophobic way. Although having this representation of male bonds steers away from traditional patriarchal expectations, there are still some underlying issues. These films are inclusive in addressing male relationships and interactions, however they are salvaging these, what should be, positive presentations by exhibiting it in a comedic manner. This creates a mockery out of bromantic-like relationships and to an extent implies that homosexuality cannot be synonymous with seriousness.

Alongside this issue of male intimacy and homosexuality proposed by bromantic comedies, the genre also has child-like, immature protagonists. Although this is a step forward from the previous male renditions, this is a negative character type to present and advertise. Both case study films conform to this ideal that in order to be nurturing and caring, men must also have a lower IQ and be juvenile. For instance, only a few minutes into the film Step Brothers, during the wedding scene (3:49), Brennan creates havoc when his mother claims he lost his job. He displays child-like behaviour by screaming in front of the wedding guests “I wasn’t fired from my job I was laid off. But you wouldn’t know the difference!” His soon to be stepbrother Dale also vacates the room in an immature, selfish exit over seeing his father and new stepmother kissing. These man-child characters, such as Brennan and Dale are accepted into the world around them despite their absurd actions and also being dependent on their parents at forty years old. Male failure to attain employment and find fulfilment in grown-up lifestyles is another childish trait that the characters possess. Neither of the fully-grown, adult men in Step Brothers, and many films alike, have any independence financially. 21 Jump Street also explores this man-child theme in a more visual portrayal, with the resurgence of the character type ‘Big Baby’. Schmidt, acted by Jonah Hill in 21 Jump Street is the epitome of the Big Baby. This character is boisterous, overweight and extremely childish. The Big Baby suggests a replacement to the alpha male, proposed in most romantic comedies. However, Jonah Hill’s character constantly idolises Channing Tatum’s character, Jenko, because he is the idealistic man, popular and athletic. This type of representation of having Schmidt look to Jenko for inspiration would perhaps suggest that Hollywood cinema is still situated in patriarchy and therefore situated in traditional male ideals of being dominant and strong. In addition, although the protagonists in 21 Jump Street have sustainable careers, they do not take them seriously. The montage (5:10) of Schmidt and Jenko when they are working on their first day on the policing job highlights this. Both characters take advantage of their position by playing around with loaded guns and rescuing a child’s Frisbee, but later throwing it back into the pond saying “Get your own fucking Frisbee”. While many of these instances propose something other than previous masculinities, it is difficult to argue that bromantic comedies are post-patriarchal entirely.

Similar to the themes of masculine failure of maintaining a career, and in most cases, maintaining a muscular body, failure to achieve sexual relationships also highlights this youthful trajectory bromantic comedies maintain. The two case study films both have scenes where the adult males are unsure of the ways to act in an intimate situation. The scene in Step Brothers where Brennan and Dale are looking at pornographic magazines (29:12) would be one example of this. They are both overwhelmed and confused at the images they see in the magazines and the film constantly plays on the idea of them being unable to act correctly towards women who they find sexually appealing. Brennan’s therapist is subject to this behaviour when he uses his therapy time to catcall her and force a date onto her. It is clear she feels uncomfortable and does not know how to respond. Dale’s stepsister in-law Alice (Kathryn Hahn) is also caught in an awkward encounter with one of the man-child protagonists, although she holds a slightly different persona. Alice has a clear attraction towards Dale and in one scene she pounces onto him and almost forces to have intercourse with him in the bathroom. During this, Dale does not understand how his body is reacting and is immersed in the fact a women is giving him the attention. Likewise, the opening scene in 21 Jump Street where Schmidt attempts to ask a girl out to prom also upholds this. He is mocked and laughed for even thinking she would consider him. These socially constructed masculine ideals of how to act around women are at odds in many bromantic comedies, with these two case study films being a few to name. Despite both of the films possible attempts to appear post-patriarchal, below this surface, it can be viewed as the antithesis. Like most bromantic comedies, the films use these constructed standards of interacting with women as comedic texts. These new representations of males only further the point that to attain a woman in an intimate setting, you have to be a traditional tall, ‘manly’ and experienced male.

Aside from the awkwardness surrounding bromantic male interactions with women that they find sexually appealing, there is also another kind of woman presented in these Hollywood films. Brennan's mother Nancy (Mary Steenburgen) in Step Brothers is an example of this on multiple occasions. This is displayed when Brennan gets protective over her. This type of behaviour can be read as Oedipal (Freud, S. 2010), with Brennan’s subconscious id bringing these thoughts to the screen. There is an underlying theme of Brennan’s taboo love for his mother and his hatred towards his new stepfather for taking her away. Many of the jokes are also directed at Brennan and how he becomes aggressive when anybody insults his mother. In addition, Nancy is one of the only female characters within the film that both Dale and Brennan can be themselves around. Therefore, the film also suggests that men behave completely different around women they do not have a conscious desire to impress. In a similar way, Schmidt also has this level of comfort and care from his mother in 21 Jump Street exhibited by the scene where Jenko meets Schmidt's parents. His mother hangs all of his achievements across the walls of their house like he is a child, despite Schmidt being an adult. Virtually all of the centric male characters have a respectful attitude towards their mothers and can be fairly normal around them, at least consciously. However, when a woman who they want to impress is involved, they are problematic and ill mannered. These instances offer a presentation of women that has not yet reached post-patriarchy, but is still situated right within it. The women are degraded, and presented as only to serve men, with their purposes being limited to suit male needs. Women are presented as merely objects for sexual gratification or mothering housewives at the male’s expense.

Alongside Brennan’s love for his mother, Freud’s psychoanalytic works can be applied to many of the other relationships and actions seen within bromantic comedies. As contended by David B. Hartwell, “It is Freud’s third stage of psychosexual development, the phallic stage, to which the bromantic males seem most unhealthily attached” (2013: 58). During this stage, the child becomes aware of the distinctly dissimilar biological counterparts between males and females. At this point, “the obsession with the penis, and also the metaphorical phallus, is manifested symbolically through [out]” (2013: 58). This is seen at the centre of most bromantic comedy Hollywood films. With the genre being a reinvention of the typical romantic comedy film, the demographic is aimed at a male spectatorship. In light of this, by utilising the phallic symbols and references throughout, it keeps the films grounded within this male-centric world - far from anything other than patriarchal. These metaphors reoccur over and over during these case study films, for instance, in Step Brothers when Brennan is accused of saying “Let’s get it on” (21:23) in a sexual manner to his brother Dale. Likewise, another point where this provocative behaviour occurs is when Brennan yells to his brother “You know what’s good for shoulder pain? If you lick my bum hole” (30:50) or when Brennan says “I feel like a lightning bolt on the tip of my penis” (41:20). These references to the male body and the obsession with the penis arise over and over in the film. In 21 Jump Street, there is a scene where Schmidt is taking a phone call and Jenko begins pressing a phallic shaped object near his crotch area (45:45). This is an explicit example of how the metaphorical phallus is employed into the bromantic comedy films, and, more importantly, within the bromantic relationships. Freud’s work on phallic symbols solidifies the theme of below-the-surface homosexuality within the genre.

Similar to Freud’s ideas on the penis as a metaphor, Rodowick (1992: 8) argues that Laura Mulvey’s (1975) male gaze theory can be applied to men also:

“She makes no differentiation between identification and object choice in which sexual aims may be directed towards the male figure, nor does she consider the signification of authority in the male figure from the point of view of an economy of masochism.”

The image of gazing and eroticism can have male subjects, despite them being an image of “authority and omnipotence” (Neale, S. 1983: 13). With the bromantic comedy being a genre aimed at a male audience, it is not surprising that the males on screen are structured around voyeurism. Although Neale proposes that the voyeurism and pleasure is restored “through violent brutality” and “male mutilation” (1983), it could be argued that the voyeurism is also produced through these newer presentations of men, such as those in the case study films. Channing Tatum’s character Jenko, and Brennan’s older brother Derek are two characters that are founded on the male anxieties, similar to how Neale suggests. The audience begins to align themselves with the male protagonist they most lionize, almost like an on-screen surrogate, so that “the power of the male as he controls events, coincides with the active power of the erotic look, both giving a satisfying sense of omnipotence” (Mulvey, L. 1975: 12). However, finding these kind of examples within and outside of the bromantic are fairly frequent, it is the less desirable protagonists such as Schmidt, Brennan and Dale who are also involved in this gaze that are often forgotten. The action of looking at the males on screen is a product of patriarchy and voyeurism. Men are portrayed as active, while women are passive; men are the priority when watching films. The viewers experience is “predicted on the pleasure of seeing the male [simply] ‘exist’” (Willemen, P. 1981: 16). This voyeuristic pleasure and repressed homosexuality lies in the spectator being in control of what they view. With the crude comedic scenes exerted throughout bromantic comedies, the male viewers have this in the forefront of their mind. Whereas before the more powerful ideal ego was something to be obtained, these contemporary males being introduced are now something men can be in control of and observe. While men previously watched films and aliened themselves with the strong male protagonist, they now dominate and control these less desirable men, proving the patriarchy still exists.

A more progressive way that bromantic comedies attempt to challenge patriarchy is by blurring the lines between what is deemed as popular or unpopular. 21 Jump Street opposes the traditional stereotypes when Schmidt and Jenko are undercover in a high school. Rather than following the ‘geek’ and ‘jock’ narrative we have seen so many times before, they flip these roles. This is ironic given that the opening sequence of the film could not be more confirmative to this discourse. We expect Schmidt to follow in his previous childhood position of being bullied, unpopular and a loner; however, it is Jenko who becomes this person. The scene where Jenko and Schmidt argue about whether to ‘one strap’ or ‘two strap’ their backpacks is an example where the film develops the idea that Jenko may have been the idealistic man in the past, but now it is beyond his reach. In that aspect, the film as a whole is a parallel to the journey that society and patriarchy is experiencing. This shift in stereotypical roles is important when analysing these films with a patriarchal view. To have the roles reversed almost encourages men to ignore the idealistic male they have been made to follow by society, because this will reward them later on. Throughout the narrative, Schmidt has the popularity and is therefore invited to parties and has a young love interest. Juxtaposing this, Jenko is part of the science committee and greets his friends with Star Wars (Lucas, G. 1977) references. This fairly new way of showing high school cliques and clichés within popular Hollywood cinema is a positive movement away from classical patriarchy. Less explicitly, Step Brothers has a similar pattern of switching roles. Brennan and Dale look up to their successful younger brother/step brother Derek as he embodies the alpha male by having a prosperous career, a beautiful family and a muscular physique; Brennan and Dale want to be him. Their idolisation over Derek is evident through the beginning of the film, but during the latter part this begins to disintegrate. It becomes clear that Derek and his wife’s marriage has collapsed when she cheats on him with Dale. Around two-thirds of the way through the film, both Dale and Brennan begin to correct their mistakes and mature. The soundtrack behind these scenes consolidates this with the lyrics “You gotta act your age, so they say” (Brion, J, McKay, A). When Derek fires Brennan, he and Dale both follow their aspirations and form a band, to which Derek is not impressed about. In the end, Brennan and Dale are the ones who are left with true happiness, while Derek longs for it. The final scene with Derek leaves him feeling emotional and reminiscing back to when he valued Brennan and all he did as his older brother. He apologises and hugs Brennan. These role reversions within bromantic comedies of the underdog living in fulfilment and the idealistic male living the opposite, connotes the importance of abolishing the patriarchy.

Typical youthful male fixations such as drugs, pornography, toys, and women also fall into the bromantic comedy genre. These tropes are often referred to as New Laddism. Whilst New Laddism existed before the popular emergence of bromantic comedies, these authentic prototypical presentations of masculinity have fell into these modern films too. Hollywood balances the bromance relationships they propose, with a seemingly desirable male ideal. There is an accentuation of male cultural ‘needs’ and for men to keep hold of their grasp to manhood, despite being involved in what should be a progressive work of cinema. For example, the pact these men have towards each other and the ‘bros before hoes’ trajectory, distinctly seen in Step Brothers. The words “Bros before hoes” are mentioned repeatedly during the song Dale and Brennan sing in their band. Likewise, the sequence when the two protagonists attend job interviews (41:00), they have to attend them together rather than independently. There are many references to porn too, such as when Dale and Brennan sit together while reading and discussing what their favourite magazine is (35:10). A final example from the film would also be when Dale says to his father, “Dad, we are men… we like to shit with the door open [and] talk about p*ssy… that’s what we do…” (04:50). 21 Jump Street incorporates Laddish themes too, particularly via the drugs the film is based around. With Schmidt and Jenko both being in the police force, the criminal world is inevitable. However, the corrupt officers themselves also take drugs alongside trying to tackle drug culture, epitomising the concept that patriarchal actions are unavoidable. Male to male humour that has pre-existed long before bromantic comedies of who is sleeping with whose daughter, sister and mother are also apparent in 21 Jump Street. The film also addresses how women are forever at the disposal of men, such as when James Franco’s character assures Schmidt he is not interested in his new partner by saying he only used her for intercourse anyway. Scenes in Step Brothers including both Dale and Brennan demanding their woman interviewer to “Shut your mouth. Just shut your mouth. Will you shut your mouth” (41:02) displays the lack of respect they have for women, and more specifically, women in the workplace. Likewise, in 21 Jump Street when the teacher is practically drooling over her student Jenko (29:12). These women who should be esteemed, are instead made a mockery of. With a large problem within feminism being women’s treatment within the workplace, the representation of women in these films does not support this movement, and therefore promotes patriarchy.

The miniscule amount of female characters, let alone leads, across the bromantic comedy genre is problematic in itself. Women serve to advance the plot rather than to have their own purpose within these narratives, proving that the patriarchy is still upheld. The Laddish male values imposed into the films also create a patriarchal environment. Replacing the central alpha males proposed in romantic comedies with the men in the bromance genre, is a large step away from the typical masculinities on screen that Hollywood have previously presented. Therefore, in terms of male-to-male relationships and changing expectations of what a ‘real’ man should be like, bromantic comedies renegotiate that well. However, the man-child immature personas these characters entail may present a different kind of male, but not necessarily a positive one. Despite the genre defying patriarchal traditions and expectations on multiple occasions, due to them being part-comedy, it is difficult to say how far these films can be taken seriously. A Hollywood cinema that achieves and illuminates full post-patriarchy is difficult when male relationships are mocked, women are vehicles for men to grow or presented in a negative light, and traditional Laddish values still remain. Bromantic comedies do address many issues that patriarchy have instilled into society and Hollywood, however, a complete post-patriarchal cinema cannot yet be said to have been fulfilled. As David B. Hartwell concludes, the films within this genre are guilty of “perpetuating the ideologies it is trying (or pretending) to critique.” (2013)

References

Alberti, J. (2013, 5 February). “I Love You, Man” Bromances, the Construction of Masculinity, and the Continuing Evolution of the Romantic Comedy”. Quarterly Review of Film and Video (via Research Gate) 30(2). 159-172.

Brion, J. McKay, A. (Unknown). Back and Forth. [Produced by Jon Brion, Performed by Rick Logan]. Step Brothers Soundtrack.

Christ, C, P. (2016, 5 April). A New Definition of Patriarchy: control of Women’s Sexuality, Private Property, and War. Feminist Theory (via Sage Journals). 24(3). 214-225.

Cohan, S. Hark, R, I. (1993). Screening the Male: Exploring Masculinities in the Hollywood cinema. London: Routledge.

Edwards, T. (1997). Men in the Mirror: Men’s Fashions, Masculinity and Consumer Society. London: Cassel.

Freud, S. (2010). The Interpretation of Dreams: The Complete and Definitive Text. New York: Basic Books Publishing.

Handy, B. (2012, 16 March). Homophobia and 21 Jump Street: Does “Just Kidding!” Negate Every Blowjob Joke? Vanity Fair. Retrieved from https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/03/is-21-jump-street-homophobic-movies

Hartwell, D, B. (December 2013). True Bromance: Representation of Masculinity and Heteronormative Dominance in the Bromantic Comedy. University of North Texas.

Lord, P. Miller, C. (Directors). (2012). 21 Jump Street. USA: Columbia Pictures Corporation.

Lucas, G. (Director). (1977). Star Wars. USA: Lucasfilm, Twentieth Century Fox.

McKay, A. (Director). (2008). Step Brothers. USA: Columbia Pictures Corporation.

Morman, M. Floyd, K. (2011, 1 September). “I Love You, Man”: Overt Expressions of Affection in Male-Male Interaction.” Sex Roles: A Journal of Research (via ProQuest) 39(9). 871-881.

Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. Munich: GRIN Publishing.

Neale, S. (1983, 1 November). Masculinity as Spectacle. Screen. 24(6). 2-16.

Rodowick, D, N. (1992). The Difficulty of Difference: Psychoanalysis, Sexual Difference and Film Theory. London: Routledge.

Willemen, P. (1981, June). Anthony Mann Looking at the Male. Framework: Te Journal of Cinema & Media. (Via EBSCO Host). 81(16-17). 16.