Hey, everybody. News Editor and Humor Editor Joe Crowe hosting Subspace today, and we're devoting it to a letter we received anonymously recently. The letter writer raises some comment-worthy points regarding the movie Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, reviewed by Jason Myers, our Movie Review Guy. The writer also mentions a comedy article I wrote, "Bitches Prefer Biccans."

Now here's what we're a-gonna do. The text of the letter is in plain type. As you go, Jason will give his thoughts in bold, and I'll close with mine in bold and sweet, sweet italics.

Subject: Jay and Silent Bob Can Kiss My Ass!

Hey - just a glaring thing about Kevin Smith's new movie you (the writer of the review) may have missed:

It was a sexist piece of trash. 

JASON MYERS: Yeah, I guess I did miss that. HmmmÖ silly me.

Girls are geeks too, and some of us don't appreciate our gender portrayed as objects that have one purpose:  to be fucked.

Well, actually, according to most biologistsÖ ah, nevermind.

The intelligence and wit of the reviews on this website has been excellent,  and the presence of actual feminist material there at the beginning was refreshing. That's why I was so disappointed to read your Jay and Silent Bob review only to see that, as usual, a guy liked the movie because it was "funny" (huh huh huh huh...der), and completely neglected to mention (notice???) that it was also totally and utterly chock full of every  derogatory image and name for women available.

Please note the sexist stereotype inherent in the phrase that begins "as usual, a guy liked the movieÖ" Don't worry kiddies, it's okay for women to make blatantly sexist remarks about men. Because sexist stereotypes about men are true, but sexist stereotypes about women are just plain sexist.

More to the point, just for fun, I checked a few statistics on the Internet Movie Datebase. Yes, many more men went to see Jay and Silent Bob than women. However, in all age groups, the women consistentlygave Jay and Silent Bob a slightly higher rating than the men did.

NOT to mention the little "joke" wherein Jay's "angel" on his shoulder suggests that he should have "whipped his dick out" when a woman was asleep.  A charming allusion to  acquaintance rape, or a charming allusion to masturbating on her or near her while she slept?  Oooo, either way, quality cinema I'm sure. Kevin Smith is so much smarter than this piece of ass movie.

Have you even seen Kevin Smith's movies? There's a poop golem in Dogma. A guy wipes his butt with his hand in Mallrats. And remember what happens at the end of Clerks? Ick. Not what I'd normally call elements of "quality cinema," but, nonetheless, Smith does make damn good films. I think I adequately warned readers when I said that the sheer crudity in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back makes American Pie look like an episode of The Care Bears. I didn't specifically warn Catholics that Jay and Silent Bob lay the smackdown on a priest, and I didn't warn Internet denizens that they would be portrayed as a bunch of scrawny 12-year-olds.

Now, before you start gearing up your comebacks, I've heard the excuses: Smith is poking fun at people like Jay... he's making a statement by blowing sexism and homophobic comments out of proportion and highlighting our perceived notions of blah blah blah.  Yeah? Look, if Kevin Smith actually thinks that people laughing at all those sexist comments are inside saying "what a fascinating commentary on sexism, and what a clever social use of fart jokes!" then he is very very stupid.  People laugh because they just think it's funny to see Jay call women "bitches" all the time and want to get into women's pants...

Yes, a percentage (a very small percentage) of the people who laugh at the things that Jay says in Jay and Silent Bob are laughing because they actually believe those things. Just as some of the people who laughed at the prejudiced things that Archie Bunker said in All in the Family laughed because they sided with Archie. No, Smith is not going for high-minded social commentary, but the analogy holds. Jay, like Archie, turns out to be a basically nice guy, in spite of his phenomenal jackass tendencies. And the audience is laughing at Jay at least as much as they are laughing with him.

As for the "people laugh because they think it's funny to see Jay call women bitches," that's absolutely true. I doubt that men laughed at that part more than women did. Also, in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, there is a scene in which an old lady is holding a cat by the tail and repeatedly beating it against a hard surface. It's a funny scene. Does that mean that I (and other Python fans) would think it was funny if someone in real life picked up a cat and started whipping it around? Of course not.

...and they like to drool over the sexed up images of the vamps in the movie.

I completely agree with this part. And there's nothing wrong with that. My girlfriend is witty, capable, kind, very intelligent, AND she has a sweet ass. I appreciate her for all those things.

Do I think that the media portrays unrealistic (and oversexed) body images? Yes. Would I single Kevin Smith out for this above, say, teen magazines, MTV, the modeling business, or a television industry in which even the minor characters and extras are way more attractive than the average person? No, especially since Smith is clearly clearly clearly lampooning the stereotypical male fantasy.

And I think that's exactly why Smith put them there. He's no dummy, he's going for the laugh.  HE finds it funny.  Well fuck him.  So don't hand me any of that pseudo-critical garbage.

How's this for pseudo-critical garbage? There's a fun hobby we learn in high school and college English classes called deconstruction. You look at a book closely to determine what the underlying messages are, what it's REALLY saying. Part of the time you can learn something from deconstruction. But most people use deconstruction as an excuse to push their own agendas or highlight their personal pet peeves. You can do the same thing with movies. Monty Python and the Holy Grail promotes cruelty to animals. Fight Club exhorts people to commit violent acts. Revenge of the Nerds stereotypes and dehumanizes people who play college sports. The Cider House Rules (I actually believe this one) romanticizes morally bankrupt protagonists (the guy seems to have no problem sleeping with the girlfriend of the person who was kind enough to give him a break, and the girl's lame excuse for cheating is that she just can't be by left by herself).

Kindly provide me with a list of your ten favorite movies, and I'll tell you about the prejudiced message inherent in each one.

Most deconstructionists are terribly narrow-sighted. Countless people will bemoan the "I've gotta have a man to be happy" message of Disney movies like Cinderella and Snow White, but never bother to take a look at how men are stereotyped and short-shrifted in those same movies. The prince has no character development. He is merely an object, a one-dimensional love-object, there only to fight off the bad guy and provide a kiss at the end. Disney's Beauty and the Beast is about learning to see a person's inner beauty, right? But look closer. At the end, the Beast turns into a (badly drawn) Euro-stud, thereby dashing the hopes of every nice-but-homely guy who knows damn well that he's not going to turn into a handsome prince no matter how many people fall in love with him.

Similarly (if I had a chip on my shoulder), I could go on and on about how terrible Jay and Silent Bob is, because it stereotypes men as sex-obsessed, insecure, brain-dead, eternal adolescents. But I don't. Why? Because I got the joke.

I fully support your right to be offended by Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. I'm not sure how to respond, however, to the idea that someone could be offended because I failed to be offended by Jay and Silent Bob.

We have now added a warning to the end of my Jay and Silent Bob review. It reads: "Warning: this movie is offensive. Offensive, offensive, offensive. There's something to offend everyone. Even you. Yeah, you, over there, you're going to be offended (or at least grossed out). Revolution SF apologizes in advance for recommending such a howlingly offensive movie. Plus which, Jason Myers wrote this review, and, truth be told, he's not any smarter than you. He knows it, and you know it. He's just trying to do his job. If you'd like to feed the movie reviewer, deposit 25 cents into the Movie Reviewer Chow dispenser. Please do not tap on the glass. It frightens him."

Smith could do so much better.

And while I'm ranting:  double phhhtttthhhbbtt for the ever charming "Biccans" article.  While very funny at first, it swiftly deteriorated into a laughable example of "pretty girls won't have sex with me so I'm gonna call them a bitch" syndrome.  *applause* That's why they won't sleep with you, cowboy. ;)

Again, I like this website and tell all my friends to come by.  I think it  rocks. I just think it'd be nice (and pretty damn *revolutionary*) to give a little more thought to how sexist and derogatory a movie is before you laud it as a must see.   (anonymous)

JOE CROWE: My turn!

What were you expecting when you clicked on the story? I think it was pretty apparent that it would contain bitch-related attempts at comedy. And where in the story exactly did it take a turn from being "very funny" to being "laughable"?

I think the experience of each writer always plays into his work. But I think, in this instance, that your "syndrome" comment lacks merit. Is it incorrect for a comic who jokes about being stuck in traffic to have gotten the idea from actually having been stuck in traffic himself?

But, as with all comedy, your mileage may vary.

Actually, some of the article was a direct parody of terms from Wicca, straight from a Wiccan dictionary I found. I'm more surprised that we got zero complaints from people with an interest in Wicca.

We printed this letter to let you all know that we don't just print letters of praise. Although we like those, too. If you'd like to comment on this topic, or any other one, just bring it to subspace@revolutionsf.com.