• Commentary
  • By
Jonah Hill (left) and Channing Tatum in ’22 Jump Street’
Sony Pictures/Courtesy Everett

A lot of us groan when we think of comedy sequels, and Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, the directors behind a string of comedy blockbusters (“The Lego Movie,” “21 Jump Street”) know this all too well. Their latest, 22 Jump Street,” opened this weekend to as-expected big box office numbers, and it knows how much audiences these days like being in on the joke. Sequels, the movie suggests, are dumber, more expensive, and just plain cynical ways for Hollywood execs to cash in on the success of first movies. Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum reprise their roles as officers Schmidt and Jenko, two guys in their 30s who pose as college students but aren’t really fooling anyone.

A lot of the humor in “22 Jump Street” centers on the relationship between Jenko and Schmidt, who share a particularly strong bond in the movie, one with seemingly all the trappings of a romantic relationship minus the sex. In light of Jonah Hill’s recent apology for using a gay slur when accosted by an aggressive papar-nazi, some critics have taken to calling out the movie for what they perceive as its underlying homophobia (or “meta-homophobia,” as one critic calls it).

For me, “22 Jump Street” is part of a recent spate of movies (“I Love You, Man,” most Judd Apatow movies) portraying just how far straight men have come when it comes to being in touch with their feelings and being able to express genuine emotion for each other. If anything, these movies seem to be making fun of homophobia, suggesting our longstanding aversion to straight guys showing affection for each other is silly and outdated. Sure, it’s funny when Jenko tells Schmidt that maybe they “should be investigating different people” or when he applies sunscreen to his partner’s neck. But is it funny because two men are saying and doing these things to each other, or is it more funny that we are still freaked out by this at all? There’s no denying that the bond between Jenko and Schmidt is real. The emotions, the jealousy, the tenderness–are all genuine. The movie doesn’t make fun of their intimacy—if we’re laughing, or are made uncomfortable by it, isn’t that more of a reflection of how we still have some progress to make?

Twenty to thirty years ago, movies like this didn’t exist. In the 80s and 90s, homophobic humor was so blatant and common (think “Revenge of the Nerds,”most Wayans brothers movies, the god-awful “Braveheart”) that it wasn’t even thought of as offensive. Whenever two men got close in these kind of buddy movies—if there was ever a moment where they seemed to cross the line—both men would back off and immediately reassert their hetero creds.(“Lethal Weapon,” anyone?) Even a recent and seemingly innocuous movie such as “Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay” was filled with gay slurs.

Straight men have evolved. They don’t seem nearly as afraid of being perceived as gay anymore, and many see no problem with expressing affection—even physical affection—with each other. We can thank James Franco for that. Say what you will about Franco, but his insistence, as a hetero man, on taking on gay projects and his casual refusal to dismiss gay rumors may have paved the way for other men to abandon their macho posturing. Of course these notions are still relatively new to us, so naturally they’re still being played for laughs. But there’s no denying that the truly intimate relationships in “22 Jump Street” are between the men: It’s not Jenko that’s jealous when Schmidt hooks up with Captain Dickson’s (Ice Cube) daughter, but rather Schmidt that’s jealous when Jenko seems to leave him for sexy quarterback Zook (Wyatt Russell).

These bro-mantic comedies are heartening. They might help straight men become more tolerant and embrace their sensitive sides. Is some of the humor crude? Of course it is. This is a mainstream, big Hollywood comedy. It’s target audience is 16-24 year-old males. All things considered, it’s a pretty smart, savvy film—far smarter and culturally sensitive than the films I was subject to as a sixteen-year-old.


For the latest entertainment news