December 3, 2006

Now I Want to Take Negotiations

by PG

If you haven't seen it yet, this video really is funny. Despite the early '90s culture wars and claims by conservatives that only crazy man-hating feminazis would advocate written sexual consent forms, the video apparently drew its inspiration from "loveologist" Dr. Ada Cadell, who in the wake of the Kobe Bryant rape recommends such forms be carried by "Superstar athletes, actors, rock stars, politicians, even entrepreneurs [who] have groupies that will do just about anything to have sex with them." Thankfully, Thank You for Smoking director Jason Reitman put a less distasteful spin on the concept.

glumbert - Sexual Consent

December 3, 2006 5:49 PM | TrackBack
Comments

Chapelle already did this.

Posted by: Armen at December 3, 2006 11:24 PM

"Oh, and to all the pricks who have been writing in their reviews of Consent that I stole it from Dave Chapelle... Consent premiered at Aspen Shorts Fest in April 2004, and was shot before Chappelle ever did that bit...

And I didn't even need to detox in South Africa."
-- Jason Reitman

I like Reitman's version better because it *doesn't* explicitly invoke Kobe, involves real lawyers -- I love the part when they agree the belt's coming off and the female lawyer gives her client a congratulatory pat on the back -- and shows the limits of contract (they didn't anticipate how to deal with threesomes).

For those who wish to compare, see Chappelle's "Love Contract."

Posted by: PG at December 4, 2006 11:11 AM

Chappelle's Show premiered on Comedy Central in January of 2003, and "Love Contract" was one of the earlier skits of the first season. That puts the airing of Chapelle's version at a much earlier date than the premiere of Reitman's version. I can believe that neither one "stole" from each other, but unless we know the shooting dates of both versions explicitly, any claims right now as to which was done first is just a pissing contest.

Why didn't Reitman say specifically when his skit was shot?

Posted by: Glenn at December 4, 2006 3:24 PM

A correction on my previous comment--"Love Contract" was a skit on the second season, airing February 11, 2004.

Posted by: Glenn at December 4, 2006 3:42 PM

As a remedy, is there a clause regarding specific performance if there is no "pacific" performance on the part of the party of the first part, or of the second part, or (as introduced near the end of the video) of the third part? Also, could the attorneys structure their legal fees on a contingency basis? Would the attorneys have a conflict of interest if they got interested in each other?

Posted by: Shag from Brookline at December 4, 2006 5:28 PM

"Would the attorneys have a conflict of interest if they got interested in each other?"

That suggests the Kids in the Hall take...

Posted by: PG at December 6, 2006 11:54 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Sitting in Review
Armen (e-mail) #
PG (e-mail) #
Dave (e-mail) #
Craig (e-mail) #
About Us
Senior Status
Chris Geidner #
Jeremy Blachman #
Nick Morgan #
Wings & Vodka #
Recent Opinions
Symposia
Persuasive Authority
De Novo Reporter
Research


Powered by
Movable Type 5.02