Life is not a John Cusack movie

1) I can't argue this any better than Klosterman and others but I'll try.

2) This is not a battle-cry against all chick-flicks. I've been known to a hand-holder or two in my day. Never been a Hanks/Ryan fan, but that lovable English bloke sure knows how to pack 'em in.

Debating this point with any female (as most discussions with the fairer sex tend to be) is completely and utterly futile. You see for women ages 20-35 (these are the only ones that really matter in this discussion) Lloyd Dobbler, John Cusack's character in Say Anything, has come to represent the male ideal. I've never seen the film before, but practically every one of my female friends have and they continually list it amongst their all-time favorites. Chief reasons among them is Lloyd and what he encounters/deals with to get the girl. (There's something about $2 in there as well, that also baffles me.)

I don't have anything wrong with Cusack. I even like some of his movies. The thing that bothers me, again echoed much more eloquently and convincingly by Klosterman, is that he has for all intents and purposes set impossibly unattainable standards by which men are judged. That's the rub, from his very first Dobbler-ian moment. "He’s the perpetual underdog. The Cusack quasi-hero is not governed by his groin, but by principles like integrity and authenticity."

The female (and sackless "friend") argument is that there are nice guys out there. Yes. Yes that is true. I consider myself a "nice guy." Nicer than 89% of the XX-challanged folks out there. But where do I, and the majority of men differ from Lloyd? The fact that I/we don't have a crack team of writers scripting out my every longing glance, my every heartfelt line of dialogue. In fact you know who's actually writing those chic-flik stanzas? Me. Guys who wear their heart on their sleeves and know how to actually listen, but have also told countless lies and half-truths to endear myself to the fairer-sex.

The difference is in how things are seen/phrased. To bed. To woo. Perhaps I'm being a bit Draconian in all this, but quite frankly the impossible standards set forth by Dobbler are the same set forth by the breathtakingly beautiful, hotty McHotpants Jessica Alba. If a real guy was to ever serenade you with "In Your Eyes", he would have to be 1) uncontrollably unoriginal, 2) trying to get in your pants as hard as humanely possible.

At the same time, the magical wonders of airbrushing and breast augmentation are seen as a false reality that women are unable to achieve. Yes, maybe so. And while specimens such as Scarlett Johansson do exist are they are in fact elusive because they are so unattainable? Whereas everyday "guys" such as Dobbler are just that? No more than the cute guy you meet in the record store or the one who sits in the cube two rows down.

Cusack's greatest crime has been to carry the Dobbler-ian character throughout his movies. I loved High Fidelity (both the movie and Hornby's novel) and while a mix-tape says "I love you," in ways no jewelery can, let's be honest withourselves shall we. As for the Serendipity, America's Sweethearts, Must Love Dogs threesome? The man knows where his bread is buttered. Then again, the man kick boxes and pulls more tail than I ever will in a million lifetime's.

I know this post was iniated by a conversation I had with a female friend regarding the status of her on/off, pseudo- guy situation. I don't know how it got here, but again, we only have John Cusack to thank. Basically what I'm saying is that the kiss/music/credits ending only happen in Hollywood for a reason.