Wow how old is this movie??
I remember watching it when i was teeny weeny!! Back then, i laughed at the ludacris thought of Arnold Schwarzenegger being pregnant. Now i wonder what this movie is trying to suggest by pushing the conventions of pregnancy?
Does this suggest men can do exactly what women do? Or is it just a silly comedy that can never become a reality?
"This film simultaneously suggests that women’s pregnancies are unremarkable and unworthy of attention. David Thomson argues that ‘the biology proposed in Junior . . . is fatuous and even offensive for it can be taken as one more way of dismissing the female body’ (1995, 24).
Is it offensive that the holder of the hypermasculine Mr Universe title is shown possessing a characterisitc that only women possess?
"Pregnant women appear to “have arrived” and are free at last from the social constraints which formerly tied them to domesticity and the private realm’ (Longhurst 2000, 458). But like Matthews and Wexler (2000), Longhurst suggests that these gains have not fully shifted ideas that ‘public displays of pregnant bodies are unseemly and improper’ (2000,
470). In Junior, female embodied experiences of pregnancy are perhaps improper and unseemly, but crucially, and in direct contrast to the finely tuned and complex presentations of a pregnant man, they are uninteresting. Women don’t change or benefit from either physical or subjective gestational experiences, as they are figured as always
already almost pregnant"
Its a pretty weird movie but it does suggest the notion of motherhood and if it is something that only women can do. I must say, it is disturbing seeing Arnold Schwarzenegger rub his sore pregnant nipples. Watching it back then i laughed but wow, Arnolds acting is shocking! (seriously, you have to watch it just to see how bad it is-its amusing :)
Well give it a watch and let me know what you all think... im undecided
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times