It just seemed... I'm going to go with "deliberately insignificant."

>*And any misgivings you have about how terrible the film's
>main character and her friends are, the film is, from a visual
>aesthetic standpoint, on another level from a lot of certainly
>brilliant films from her contemporaries. And Judd Apatow is
>excellent at spotting directorial talent (those who can't do,
>teach, and all that).

Wait. Did it look "professional quality" or "on another level... from her contemporaries"? Because it sounds like there should be a pretty big gap between those things, unless I'm misunderstanding her contemporaries.

edit: And I'm curious about the Apatow point. Is the parenthetical there a nod to the frequent knock against him that his visual sense is "indifferent" but that he does a good job of teaching/unearthing people who are good at that? I wasn't aware of that reputation. Kind of cool.