Sexist, predictable, and genre-challenged

I'm in full agreement with those viewers who complain that this movie can't figure out what it wants to be when it grows up. And that it's too predictable. I admit that an inevitable outcome won't destroy a movie, but in such cases, the journey should be worth it. Even so, I don't mind a little mindless entertainment now and then. The problem with this film, for me, is that its initial premise is so blatantly sexist. There's no evidence that the Julianne Moore character got pregnant on purpose, so I can't complain that she was malicious. But c'mon, does the guy always have to be the villain in the beginning? Why is he always painted as a jerk for not wanting an unplanned baby? In the movies, when a pregnancy is accidental, it seems that the guy is always the one who's not getting with the program. There's rarely any talk about alternatives like abortion or adoption. No, it's daddyhood, all the way, or he's a complete cad. It's sexist.

Some might say that this movie was brave enough to mention abortion. As I remember the course of events, the subject didn't even come up until more than three months had gone by and an abortion was out of the question. It might be argued that only poor single women should give up their babies for adoption and that middle-class people of reasonable means should bring up the kid themselves, even if they don't want kids. Well, that's great for a child's psychological development, isn't it? You can also argue that the Moore character wanted the child, so her boyfriend should at least be forced to support her financially. Okay, granted; having sex is a risk, and there are consequences. In a more ideal world, I would like to see the female character being mature enough to say, "Well, this wasn't planned, and you didn't want any part of it from the beginning, but I want the baby anyway. Since I'm making the decision for both of us, I absolve you of any responsibility whatsoever. I don't need you or your money. No hard feelings, eh?" Or she could say, "Well, this wasn't planned, and you didn't want any part of it from the beginning. I'll abort the fetus/give up the baby for adoption, and we'll only have kids when and if we are both of the same mind on the subject."

I don't see such attitudes becoming de rigueur in Hollywood (or necessarily even in society) anytime soon. The only way to resolve the "nine months" dilemma in Hollywood is to artificially force the male protagonist to have a change of heart and become uberdad. Such films imply that the guy will get with the program--HER program--or he isn't a real man. She's automatically right, and he's automatically wrong--until he comes around to her point of view, and then it's all violins and pink hearts and happy happy family man.

That's the attitude that I find so distasteful about this film. This movie automatically assumes that the man is wrong to not want a child, it forces the baby on the man, and then impending fatherhood turns the man into a stand-up guy who really does want a kid after all. Puh-lease. I don't find that funny at all.