So here it is…while the movie was wrong to slap Bateman’s characters hand without slapping Garner’s, why can’t it be that they BOTH are rewarded for recognizing what they really want in life and not being afraid to leave the comfort of couplehood and suburbia just because it’s scary.

Why is it wrong for Garner’s character to want to be a mother…there’s nothing wrong with that, just like there’s nothing wrong with Bateman’s character not wanting (or not being ready) to be a father.

While I agree that Garner’s character was a bit revered and Bateman’s character was a bit chastised, even the scene in which they were breaking up was not one of pointing fingers, it was very matter of fact. Also pretty unrealistic probably, but if it had been more realisitc it also would have probably been more preachy that he was oh so wrong and bad for leaving her. I think they did a fairly even handed job considering.

And I don’t think Juno was put there as the “love interest” as much as the catalyst for him to realize what he did and didn’t want in life. He wasn’t falling in love with her, he was just falling in love with his youth…or the idea of it, all over again.

ps – you look awesome in red and gold.