I'm not talking about films about 'the PUA scene' i.e Tao of Steve/Hitch/Crazy, Stupid Love etc.

I'm talking about when you are watching a film/Tv show and you think:

'Wow. The guy that wrote this movie understands women/sexuality/attraction/seduction pretty well and (he) probably has some decent game.'

vs times when you are watching a movie/show and you think:

'Wow. The dude that wrote this has no fucking idea'.

I think Inbetweeners is a major offender. The blokes that write that clearly have no idea how real women think, talk and behave or why. All the interactions between Will and Charlotte are especially awful in this regard imo.The way the James Bonds (that aren't Sean Connery) pick up women wouldn't work 9/10 either. Direct and punny, like a randy drunken uncle at a family BBQ? Not a good look. (gotta love Austin Powers for sending it up though ). Oh and Appatow movies also tend to misrepresent women and female sexuality/attraction. Although that bit with the 'freaky girl' from 40Year Old virgin who accidentally thinks Andy is 'a badass' when he's complaining about being set up with a tranny is a cool exception imo.

On the other hand:
Body Heat has some good back and forth banter flirty. Jerry Maguire is a good one too. It's Complicated. Stealing Beauty. Lolita (the 1990s one). Basic Instinct (girl on boy/s seduction). Oh and ANYTHING by Woody Allen (Match Point/Vicky Cristina etc).

Those are some movies that I think are written by people with a solid grasp of social dynamics/seduction and female sexuality.

What do you reckon? Agree? Disagree? Thoughts? Suggested movies/shows?

Can't wait to hear everyone's take on this. No wrong answers it's all good. Go.

Seriously...no body knows what I'm on about here? You guys MUST watch tv/films?

ye, but, films get to write the pre determined response

all these pua gurus appear the same.... to know women inside out

but canned shit dont work. But their RESPONSES they assume sound good

Not sure I follow.

I'm not talking about recycling and re using canned shit from films or anything like that if that's what you are getting at?

What I'm getting as is that:

If you watch something like Inbetweeners, say the scene where Will pulls Charlotte at a house party, his banter is just so awkward and so awful yet her RESPONSES to him are posetive for no apparent reason. She responses in a way no girl on earth ever would do to THAT GUY saying THAT SHIT in THAT CONTEXT...

His character isn't famous or rich or anything else in the context of the scene that might cause her character to tolerate his awful banter or be attracted to him despite it, right? He hasn't demonstrated any Higher value in any sense or whatever, in that scene he's just the new (slightly nerdy) boy, she's the popular girl and he just comes on to her in a really leery needy desperate pathetic way, then he puts down his similarly pathetic leery mate (Jay) when he does that awful crazy frog impression...and yet somehow she just BUYS it?

The only reason the scene plays out like that is because it's written by a guy that's clearly never actually hit on a girl in real life and so has literally no idea how or why a girl might be attracted to one bloke over another. The scene just reinforces the idea of 'getting lucky'. It's as if Charlotte was just 'paying out' when Will came to the table and no matter what he said or did he'd hit 'the jackpot' anyway.

It's like the writer doesn't understand on any level how attraction or seduction or social interaction in general might actually work in real life...and that is something that's apparent in the way the characters interact with each other.

Make any sense?

Joker, you have to think of it like this, out there is a girl who likes puns and crap jokes! Out there is a girl who finds Will's humour funny.

People make movies about events, coincidences and stacked odds as it sells when written half-decently (i didn't say well). Not all girls do act like that and yes movie writers ham up the usual social conditioning that we all believe, it doesn't make it all tosh.

Plus if people showed how seduction and attraction actually worked, everybody would do it and social dynamics would change again!

Before I got into PU, realized it was bullshit and organized the way that I thought/behaved, I was like Will (though not quite as bad) the 10 girls I'd slept with just happened to like my crap humour or were really drunk and horny.
I'd managed to find 3 ltr girlfriends who just happened to find me attractive even though I could be socially awkward. Take the girl below, 2 years older than me HB8, just happened to find me funny, but i wasn't pulling girls like that constantly.
Me n claire.jpg

Now however I am. Stuff in the movies does happen, just few and far between - they just make people believe it happens more regularly than it does

A happy ending is a story that hasn't finished yet...

coz otherwise it wouldnt be funny. films & programs aim are not realise, but to inspire the type of audience who watch it.

i think they just understand what works to grab attention.

Well you'll have to forgive me from disagreeing. I think guys Rogan and Goldberg actually DON'T have any idea how attraction/social dynamics/women work and THAT'S what shows in their films (to me atleast).

And btw, I realise that yes right now/today Seth Rogan couldn't spend five seconds out doors anywhere in america without tripping into some supermodel's pussy but that doesn't mean the guy (as a writer) actually has the faintest clue about what makes women or attraction tick any more than any other famous bloke does.

Not the way that writers like Woody Allen or Darren Aronovsky (The Wrestler/Black Swan) do...

Movies like Knocked Up and Superbad are about how some sad pathetic nerdy socially awkward pot smoking loser ends up getting his nuts wet with some stunner not because he grows a pair and stops acting like such a dork gets himself down the gym and sorts his negative attitude out and learns some basic social graces...but because the stunner characters in those stories 'MUST' end up coming round to seeing the fat lazy pot smoking no hoper the way he sees himself.

These are clearly fantasies written by blokes that understand the world/people in a certain way.That's what I'm getting at.

Right. But how much of the time is it written that way on purpose/because it's funny/to inspire and pander to a type of audience etc...

...and how many times is it written that way because the bloke that wrote it CAN'T write it any better or more complex?

Compare Inbetweeners to Peep Show. The way Jez in Peep Show interacts with and seduces women is also really funny. But the social dynamics and the way the interactions and the relationships work in Peep Show is clearly smarter and more complex and more REALISTIC than the kinda stuff in Inbetweeners. To me it's pretty clear that the Peep Show writers know a darn sight more about getting stinky fingers (in real life) than any of the writers on Inbetweeners.

Know what I mean?

Disagree.

A REAL coming of story about a guy like Fogel should/would have him ACKNOWLEDGE and UNDERSTAND the faults/flaws that hold him back and be assertive in doing something about them.

But that’s not THIS movie.

OF COURSE looking and acting like Fogel/McLovin doesn’t get anyone laid. Guys that look/act like that limp wristed clown don’t get any pussy because they don’t DESERVE to.

The film's not interested in showing him getting his shit together and actually growing a pair. The movie doesn't end with him learning to be a better version of the person he actually IS... but rather an awful version of something he ISN'T (i.e 'bad ass' criminal)

The point isn’t that 'people are attracted to people for all sorts of reasons'. My point is that in reality women are NOT attracted to 'men' that think and act and look like Fogel and understanding why would be first step in any coming of age story about that kinda kid...

Looking and thinking and acting like Fogel is a CHOICE. No one is BORN with a 6 pack. He CAN lift weights, He CAN buy some clothes that fit him instead of wearing that gay Aladdin jacket, He CAN take up sports, He CAN strive to improve his social skills, he CAN strive for success in other areas of interest that might improve his social worth as a knock-on...but he DOESN'T and as a result his life and relationships fall short of being where he wants them to be....Accept they fucking don’t. And of course he just gets his nuts wet with some babe anyway...because like I'm trying to say this movie is wish fulfilment for nerds that celebrates being a nerd rather than a TRUE coming-of-age movie...which would be about growing up and not being one anymore.

And this sort of 'nerd wank fantasy' type of representation of social dynamics/attraction/seduction seems to be really really common, especially in American film/tv:

So is it because:

a)...Most writers are clever and write with a target audience of socially retarded nerds in mind?
OR;
b)...Most writers ARE socially retarded nerds?


And don't even get me started on Knocked Up...

having my foot halfway in the industry, there's also something that you've gotta consider.

What's gonna sell more in a story? What are the sheeple going to want to see (more than once preferably)?

Reality where you have to bust your ass to become an attractive person, or a story where a lazy, introverted guy gets a hot girl by doing the same things over and over and at the end still gets to be a lazy pothead/gamer?

And do girls want a story where the cute girl ends up with a dickhead, or with the nice sensitive guy she dreams of? Likely the second, but don't forget the fact that she'd get bored with him within a week or less... something that she doesn't consider when she's there watching a movie.


Oftentimes, imaginary is better than reality. There's a reason there's no movies about people doing 9-5 jobs that don't have some wonderful plot twist halfway through. People are lazy, and want things handed to them. And that's exactly what the movie industry thrives on.