Seriously, it's not smart or clever, it's just name-dropping. I love how many people are fooled by this. I should just say "Voltaire" or "Marx" every other sentence so people will think I'm a huge brainiac.
I actually agree with you wolfdancer648. The dialogs weren't very witty and I didn't like the movie that much. Usually when I say that this is the part where somebody tells me that it's because I am too dumb to "get it".
But the movie had penis and sex jokes done a million times in other movies, and usually in a better fashion. And yes, the characters were name-dropping a lot. I understand that they like Sinatra, Gainsbourg, etc., but the name-dropping still represents everything that passes for wit in their dialogs.
The better parts for me were with François, mainly because it's when the movie remembered it's supposed to be fun. And it proved that Cera can act, something I didn't know.
I don't know if the author of the book intended it to be this way, but the way I interpret it in the book and from the movie, Nick and Sheeny don't really know much about these people they name drop. They both perceive themselves as intelligent and hold themselves above others but really they are just poseurs.
That's why so many people seem to be "THEY MENTIONED CAMUS THEY ARE TRYING TO SEEM INTELLIGENT" perhaps it is because that's what the characters themselves were actually doing.
While they may be above average IQ wise, I don't think they know half as much about what they'd like each other and the supporting cast to believe.
It actually would make sense. At one point Cera's character says that he loves a movie, but gets the name of the director wrong. Maybe it just means that they act pretentious but don't know much about these people.
Ugh. Great. So our plucky protagonists are just a couple of self-important, socially inept, sexually angsted wannabes with complete delusions of grandeur? This truly must be one for the newer generation.
That would be the point of the characters and the dialog... ZOOOOOOOM right over your head.
The teenagers used their limited knowledge of "adult topics" to try and impress others, as well as to escape their bland lower class lives.
That was their device to pretend to be "better" than they were, yet the audience knew that the teen's backgrounds were not in higher learning or high-class lifestyles.
That is the point as which you are supposed to feel sympathetic and a little amused by their "pretention". You know it isn't real, even to them, but it gives them a little comfort in their dingy, depressing worlds.
Try to feel something FOR the characters, rather than just analyzing their behavior straight up, and you may enjoy the movie a little more.
The book makes them even MORE pretentious, but that's the point - they are so over the top, it's entertaining. But you certainly wouldn't want them over to your house for tea!
Yeah, I guess that did go over my head... and by that, I mean the fact that the characters in this movie were deliberately stupid and unbearable instead of just accidentally. Great. That's like me intentionally taking a dump on your carpet and expecting you to accept it as a work of art.
one of the first posts where i came here agreeing with OP then was genuinely persuaded. i initially was genuinely annoyed, so much so i paused and came here to affirm my quibble, but by the end of the film the scope of the movie broadens and by the time they actually know and care for each other they're not talking with such contrived and affected speech. but playing devil's advocate its not a giant leap away from severely annoying
lol, yeah Sinatra sure is an underground act, not like he's loved by literally hundreds of millions of people and is one of the most famous entertainers in the history of the world.
Having a character love Sinatra sure is a shocking, pretentious attempt at pandering, because nobody likes him, it's totally underground.