'Due Date': Life is Weird, Isn't It?

The ride in Due Date is not only the usual raucous escapade, with car crashes and run-ins with authorities, but also takes a turn toward what might be called Peter's dark side.

Due Date

Director: Todd Phillips
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Zach Galifianakis, Michelle Monaghan, Juliette Lewis, Jamie Foxx, Danny McBride, RZA, Matt Walsh
Rated: R
Studio: Warner Bros.
Year: 2010
US date: 2010-11-05 (General release)
UK date: 2010-11-05 (General release)

However valuable boys-bonding movies may be, it remains difficult to comprehend the sheer awfulness of girls' roles in them. While Lesley Mann has famously maintained a sort of unlikely integrity in her several essays into the genre under the auspices of her husband Judd Apatow, it's more often the case that girls are left to kvetch, misunderstand, worry, not get, and be/fall in love with imbeciles. That these man-children might also have redeeming qualities -- they're vaguely bright, occasionally charismatic or vulnerable, or they're Michael Cera -- doesn't actually make any of them less imbecilic. It only makes them tolerable, which means Elizabeth Banks or Katherine Heigl or Mila Kunis agrees to marry them. And the rest of us are left wondering what we missed.

The impossible situation of Sarah (Michelle Monaghan) is indicated by the title of Due Date. From the start you know she's scheduled to have a baby, by Cesarean, because her husband Peter (Robert Downey Jr.) describes "the strangest dream" he's just had, while speaking with her by phone from his Atlanta hotel room bed. In this dream (which you might call oddly sympathetic or, less generously, extremely control-freaky anxious), he discovers her in a hospital giving birth, at which point a bear intervenes and chews the umbilical cord. Peter continues his conversation with Sarah as he makes his way to the airport, whereupon she wishes him a safe flight to LA and he runs smack into his buddy to be, Ethan Tremblay (Zach Galifianakis) -- in slow motion, no less.

Of course, the shrewdly edgy Peter and earnestly naïve Ethan are horribly mismatched, a point underscored when they end up near one another on the plane, and as much as Peter tries to shush his new acquaintance, the words "terrorist" and "bomb" are uttered loudly enough that a federal air marshal first shoots Peter (with a rubber bullet), then hauls them both from the plane and into interview rooms. This noisy plot machinery gets them where the movie needs them, on a no-fly list and in a rental car, traveling west.

"Life is weird, isn't it?" chirps Ethan as they head out. Peter predictably rolls his eyes and does his best not to converse with his new companion, chatty Ethan just wants to know everything about him, including his favorite color and how he met his wife (oh yes, her). Ethan has lots of info to share, from favorite TV show (Two and a Half Men) to his hopes for an acting career in LA. As Ethan's headshots grant Peter and you, looking over his shoulder, more chances to roll eyes, you realize that you're invited here to align yourself with a guy who's not a little annoying. Yes, you know that he'll be learning life lessons in the course of his adventures with Ethan, but his careless cruelty is getting a little creepy too.

It gets creepier. The ride in Due Date is not only the usual raucous escapade, with car crashes and run-ins with authorities (in this case, Mexican border guards, when Ethan takes a wrong turn), but also takes a turn toward what might be called Peter's dark side. Once again, such a turn isn't original for the genre (see: Dinner For Schmucks), but Downey and Galifianakis, both exceptional performers, make the cliché especially brutal. This is party because of the discomfort brought on by the plainly stupid physical antics (throwing punches and slamming heads into cars and getting high jokes), but also by Peter's fierce articulations: the guy can talk trash.

Like other movies of this sort, this one at first limits your perspective (so you're laughing at the schmucks) and then readjusts it (so you feel at least a little badly for laughing). Still and again, that emotional and moral journey is less instructive than familiar and unserious. It's safe to say another bonding boys movie will take you down the same road, and you'll still be laughing at and also celebrating the imbecile, whether for his sense of freedom, openness, or sheer energy. The lesson is apparently endlessly learnable.

Here the formula is tinged with rudimentary ambiguity and even some complexity, as Ethan grapples with a recently dead father (whose ashes he carries in a coffee can) and Peter faces becoming one. As these circumstances suggest an eventual coming to terms -- and even mutual appreciation -- they also set up for some broadly conceived hijinks (yes, the ashes occasion an outrageous sort of joke, as in Meet the Parents).

The emotional version of these hijjinks include Peter taking pity on Ethan for his loss (and his sometimes blubbery expressions of it) and also Ethan's surprisingly diabolical revenge against Peter's jabs. That's not to say Ethan knows what he's doing when he suggests Sarah might have cheated on Peter with Peter's best friend Darryl (Jamie Foxx, Downey's co-star in another sort of buddy movie, The Soloist). It is to say the result is as perverse and uncomfortable as anything else in the film, when, after long hours of dismissing and abusing Ethan, Peter takes up his suggestion about Sarah pretty much immediately, going so far as to imagine the baby is black.

Whether this is a brilliant evocation of the white guy's ultimate nightmare or an opportunistic joke, it's premised on the girl as property-and-plot-point, again. Surely, by now, no one is expecting Sarah to be developed, have a life, or even much of an opinion on anything. She's mostly a very pregnant body on the other end of Peter's phone calls, patient and sweet and hopeful he'll be home in time for the birth. Unlike you, she has no sense of the boys' evolving conflict and friendship, and so she can't possibly know what to make of the burst of anxious and bloodied bodies into her delivery room. But that's not her job here, to know what to do. She's only got to make room for the boys bonding.


The year in song reflected the state of the world around us. Here are the 70 songs that spoke to us this year.

70. The Horrors - "Machine"

On their fifth album V, the Horrors expand on the bright, psychedelic territory they explored with Luminous, anchoring the ten new tracks with retro synths and guitar fuzz freakouts. "Machine" is the delicious outlier and the most vitriolic cut on the record, with Faris Badwan belting out accusations to the song's subject, who may even be us. The concept of alienation is nothing new, but here the Brits incorporate a beautiful metaphor of an insect trapped in amber as an illustration of the human caught within modernity. Whether our trappings are technological, psychological, or something else entirely makes the statement all the more chilling. - Tristan Kneschke

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.