School for scoundrels is an actual essay about "what it means to be a man" and male insecurity. pick up artistry if you may. solid concepts of theories about what's manly or not, what makes women fall in love...and above all the notion that women aren't much more than a prize for the real masculinity. they don't have wishes on their own, they are merely fascinated by fancy dinners, big cars and a luscious life. and they ultimately are the evidence that the men next to them are a real man: after all he was able to "get" her.
now you wonder how long pop culture teach men to behave a certain way. Henry Palfrey is a high class man but seems to be a loser: he's not respected by anyone. he's not the best as impressing women - no car, no sense of fashion, and mostly no self respect. he let's others control and decide for him in all aspects of life. that's why he decides to join the college of lifemanship where he will be told how to be a "proper man" - this college is nothing more than the modern "pick up schools" popularized mostly by Neil Strauss 40 years later (that now regrets a lot of it) and his book "the game".
now yes: i had a lot of pity for Henry at the beggining. what is he really when he just was completely surpassed by Delauney at "winning" apirl? a loser. a complete loser that can't even take a girl to a date. this school plays with men insecurities - and henry will start to follow a certain script in order to become the real guy he wants to be. but will he be able not to lose his soul in the process?
My problem with the movie is that it takes too long measuring the "value" of delauney vs henry. the prize in their eyes is april, but we're just presented with two characters with not a lot of deepness (and april is almost a prop as a character) being against each other because one is "manly" and the other isn't. each scene seems to work more as a comedy sketch than exactly a film. i don't find any characer utterly memorable, even though i did like henry in general.
the movie is more a comedy, even though is very subtle too subtle for me. i think "the art of self defense" which is this pretty much is more laughable. but maybe that's my problem. my main issue here is how the story is a bit repetitive somehow and how we're just watching pawns doing stuff that wants to be laughable and sometimes succeeds.
but yes, the art of self defense and fight club are part of these type of films. this movie is an important piece because it shows the idea f what's a man or not is old. the cliches are old. the "pick up artistry" is pretty old too: we've been fed the same crap all over again, and a lot if not most of us still falls for it from time to time. i know i do. it's a very poignant movie that feels short because i didn't find the characters very compelling nor the situations very laughable. also think the script could be better crafted.
but i understand why this is a gem for a lot of people: i also keeo wuth tenderness the classic portuguese comedy films from the 40's even knowing that if i was a completely impartial viewer i wouldn't love them as much. still: this is very poignant and relevant now a days. should be seen by men and women, with everyone knowing that we're not that far from this tree now a days.
now you wonder how long pop culture teach men to behave a certain way. Henry Palfrey is a high class man but seems to be a loser: he's not respected by anyone. he's not the best as impressing women - no car, no sense of fashion, and mostly no self respect. he let's others control and decide for him in all aspects of life. that's why he decides to join the college of lifemanship where he will be told how to be a "proper man" - this college is nothing more than the modern "pick up schools" popularized mostly by Neil Strauss 40 years later (that now regrets a lot of it) and his book "the game".
now yes: i had a lot of pity for Henry at the beggining. what is he really when he just was completely surpassed by Delauney at "winning" apirl? a loser. a complete loser that can't even take a girl to a date. this school plays with men insecurities - and henry will start to follow a certain script in order to become the real guy he wants to be. but will he be able not to lose his soul in the process?
My problem with the movie is that it takes too long measuring the "value" of delauney vs henry. the prize in their eyes is april, but we're just presented with two characters with not a lot of deepness (and april is almost a prop as a character) being against each other because one is "manly" and the other isn't. each scene seems to work more as a comedy sketch than exactly a film. i don't find any characer utterly memorable, even though i did like henry in general.
the movie is more a comedy, even though is very subtle too subtle for me. i think "the art of self defense" which is this pretty much is more laughable. but maybe that's my problem. my main issue here is how the story is a bit repetitive somehow and how we're just watching pawns doing stuff that wants to be laughable and sometimes succeeds.
but yes, the art of self defense and fight club are part of these type of films. this movie is an important piece because it shows the idea f what's a man or not is old. the cliches are old. the "pick up artistry" is pretty old too: we've been fed the same crap all over again, and a lot if not most of us still falls for it from time to time. i know i do. it's a very poignant movie that feels short because i didn't find the characters very compelling nor the situations very laughable. also think the script could be better crafted.
but i understand why this is a gem for a lot of people: i also keeo wuth tenderness the classic portuguese comedy films from the 40's even knowing that if i was a completely impartial viewer i wouldn't love them as much. still: this is very poignant and relevant now a days. should be seen by men and women, with everyone knowing that we're not that far from this tree now a days.