What ruins a movie for you?

[Laurie4H]

For me it’s when people know there is a killer on the lose or a supernatural creature or monster yet they go investigate by themselves without any realistic fear that they might be the next victim.  

[proserpina65]

Although there are exceptions, historical dramas which egregiously distort or completely disregard the mores and culture of the time period in which they're set.  It's not that hard to research a period with the internet now.

[Shannon L.]

Toilet humor.  I may have otherwise enjoyed Bridesmaids if it weren't for that stupid food poisoning scene and the campfire scene in Blazing Saddles brought my enjoyment of that movie down a notch, just to name a couple of examples.

[Spartan Girl]

Twists that came so far out of left field or completely out of the characters they've built up.

[Browncoat]

Bad science.

[mariah23]

All just a dream.

[Ms Blue Jay]

Vomit scenes , especially within the first 5-10 minutes.  You'd be shocked to note how often this happens

[Ms Blue Jay]

9 hours ago, Shannon L. said:

Toilet humor.  I may have otherwise enjoyed Bridesmaids if it weren't for that stupid food poisoning scene and the campfire scene in Blazing Saddles brought my enjoyment of that movie down a notch, just to name a couple of examples.

Yeah.  I really wanted to like the movie "Friday" and I did - except for the toilet humour.  "Bridesmaids" would be absolute perfection without that scene.

Frankly, I don't need to see anyone on the toilet ever, and yet I feel like it's becoming more and more frequent.  Woman sitting on a toilet.  A woman getting completely naked but a man completely clothed - this trope was absolutely all over the place in the 1980s, but I rolled my eyes watching Malcolm and Marie like a dozen times because it kept inserting all of the tropes I just HATE.

Edited February 16, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Wiendish Fitch]

For me? Three words:

Fucking. Villain. Apologia.

Yeah, I know, I'm beating a dead horse, but I'm so, so, so sick of it. Raya and the Last Dragon is the latest offender (which is a shame, because there's a lot of nice stuff in that movie). I'm still grinding my teeth over Cruella's existence, and I know this trend isn't going away anytime soon. Just let villains be villains! Stop woobie-fying these assholes! It's more fun to enjoy their wicked ways, and then cheer when they're defeated!

At least the fandom for Kylo Ren has quieted down. That's something.

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

For me? Three words:

Fucking. Villain. Apologia.

Yeah, I know, I'm beating a dead horse, but I'm so, so, so sick of it. Raya and the Last Dragon is the latest offender (which is a shame, because there's a lot of nice stuff in that movie). I'm still grinding my teeth over Cruella's existence, and I know this trend isn't going away anytime soon. Just let villains be villains! Stop woobie-fying these assholes! It's more fun to enjoy their wicked ways, and then cheer when they're defeated!

At least the fandom for Kylo Ren has quieted down. That's something.

Piggy-backing off that, when the bad guy gets with everything. See also: Mr. Potter in It’s A Wonderful Life and General/Secretary Ross in the MCU movies. Him just randomly showing up at Tony’s funeral with zero comeuppance for anything he did to the Avengers ruined Endgame for me—along with that other part.

[Irlandesa]

Public declarations of love.  I love romcoms and romantic moments but it completely takes me out of it to have a crowd "oooing" during these intimate moments.

Animals getting hurt or killed.  No. Just no. 

[methodwriter85]

On 2/15/2022 at 2:37 PM, mariah23 said:

All just a dream.

I absolutely loathe extended fake out sequences. Now, I don't mind it if it's a twist that goes all the way to the beginning, a la "they were actually dead all along." That's cool. What pisses me off is if they take something that happens in the middle of the movie, and then we keep following that thread, only for them to go, "Oh, actually, what you've been watching for the past 15-30 minutes never happened and it's a big ol' sike!" 

[Spartan Girl]

I like happy endings as much as anyone, but not when they’re pulled off by a cheat. And by cheat, I usually mean a plot hole/inconsistency. Stephen King summed it up brilliantly with Annie’s infamous Rocketman serial rant in Misery, referring to Rocketman being locked in a car going over a cliff, only to have the next episode “cheat” and retcon that with “oh he actually WAS out of the car, you just didn’t see him get out.”

See also the Family Guy version:

 

Edited February 24, 2022 by Spartan Girl

[supposebly]

I watched The Protege on Netflix last night. It was a perfectly serviceable popcorn movie with Maggie Q, Michael Keaton and Samuel L. Jackson, all actors I like. 

Until they decided to put 40 years old Maggie Q in bed with 70 years old Michael Keaton. Don't get me wrong, I think he is sexy but I had to go away and do something else until that scene was done. Ugh. It wasn't even necessary for the plot. One could make a case that her character would be attracted to older men due to her back story but the movie/script wasn't good enough to flesh something like that out.

So, putting women together with men who could be their father ruins things for me.

[Ms Blue Jay]

I was doing my own personal research on this topic and there are movies where the male lead is 40 years older than the female lead.  40 years. 40 years!  Can you believe that?  

Edited February 25, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Wiendish Fitch]

1 hour ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I was doing my own personal research on this topic and there are movies where the male lead is 40 years older than the female lead.  40 years. 40 years!  Can you believe that?  

I hate to admit, but yes, I can totally believe it.

Lionel Barrymore first played my grandfather, later my father, and finally, he played my husband. If he'd lived, I'm sure I would have played his mother. That's the way it is in Hollywood. The men get younger and the women get older.~Lillian Gish

There are way too many stories about actresses getting screwed over for roles because they're "too old". I could be his daughter, but I'll be dead before Tom Cruise is ever told he's "too old" for a part. 

Edited February 25, 2022 by Wiendish Fitch

[magicdog]

On 2/14/2022 at 1:35 PM, proserpina65 said:

Although there are exceptions, historical dramas which egregiously distort or completely disregard the mores and culture of the time period in which they're set.  It's not that hard to research a period with the internet now.

An addendum to this is when historical parts are cast with ethnicities that are entirely wrong.  

Case in point:  Ann Boleyn (from the miniseries) was not black!  Would casting directors consider casting a white or Asian actor in the part of Malcolm X or Harriet Tubman or Frederick Douglass?  I think not.

I know I risk opening a can of worms (Rita Moreno as a Burmese woman in the King & I, Natalie Wood as a Puerto Rican woman in the original West Side Story, Liz Taylor and Claudette Colbert as Cleopatra - who was Greek), but some recent casting choices are just ridiculous and pandering to various groups rather than focusing on a good movie.  

[Ms Blue Jay]

2 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I hate to admit, but yes, I can totally believe it.

Lionel Barrymore first played my grandfather, later my father, and finally, he played my husband. If he'd lived, I'm sure I would have played his mother. That's the way it is in Hollywood. The men get younger and the women get older.~Lillian Gish

There are way too many stories about actresses getting screwed over for roles because they're "too old". I could be his daughter, but I'll be dead before Tom Cruise is ever told he's "too old" for a part. 

Emmy Rossum is going to play Tom Holland's mother in a new movie.

Yes.  You read that right.

Apparently there's some sort of "Excuse" for this.  To that I say, there's always an excuse isn't there?  Always an excuse to cast someone a woman who is way too young for a role.  Reminds me of how Jennifer Lawrence was cast in every David O. Russell movie ever, even though the parts she was playing were supposed to be way older.  

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/tom-holland-emmy-rossum-crowded-room-b2021431.html

[ursula]

9 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

Emmy Rossum is going to play Tom Holland's mother in a new movie.

Yes.  You read that right.

Apparently there's some sort of "Excuse" for this.  To that I say, there's always an excuse isn't there?  Always an excuse to cast someone a woman who is way too young for a role.

Not too young, since she'll be playing a 30+ single mother when her character's son is a child.  

The premature outrage at this casting news, when just a little research would have explained everything baffles me. 

For Dune, 35-year-old Rebecca Fergurson (and 40-year old Oscar Isaac) were cast to play 24-year-old Timothee Chalamet's parents, and everyone seemed pretty OK with the idea that Lady Jessica was 9 when she became a mother. 

 

Edited February 26, 2022 by ursula

[Ms Blue Jay]

I'm not okay with it.

[Simon Boccanegra]

On 2/26/2022 at 2:26 AM, ursula said:

For Dune, 35-year-old Rebecca Fergurson (and 40-year old Oscar Isaac) were cast to play 24-year-old Timothee Chalamet's parents, and everyone seemed pretty OK with the idea that Lady Jessica was 9 when she became a mother. 

The young hero, Paul, is 15 when we first encounter him. Maybe with adaptational license, we're supposed to think he's a little older than he was in Frank Herbert's telling, but nine years older would be a stretch. 

But Chalamet is still in the phase of being able to get by with playing a teenager. It doesn't last forever for anyone, but he can still do it (his slightness helps), and he brings name recognition and a fan base with him. Plus, it's a long-spanning saga, with only a portion being covered in Villeneuve's first film. He doesn't remain 15. 

The then-unknown Seattle stage actor Kyle MacLachlan was the same age, 24, while shooting of the earlier Dune film was ongoing. His screen parents were only slightly older than the Ferguson/Isaac pair. Francesca Annis was in her late thirties, and Jürgen Prochnow in his early forties. 

[methodwriter85]

On 2/25/2022 at 3:28 PM, magicdog said:

I know I risk opening a can of worms (Rita Moreno as a Burmese woman in the King & I, Natalie Wood as a Puerto Rican woman in the original West Side Story, Liz Taylor and Claudette Colbert as Cleopatra - who was Greek), but some recent casting choices are just ridiculous and pandering to various groups rather than focusing on a good movie.  

Color blind vs.  Identity-Conscious casting

 

[Ohiopirate02]

On 2/25/2022 at 3:28 PM, magicdog said:

An addendum to this is when historical parts are cast with ethnicities that are entirely wrong.  

Case in point:  Ann Boleyn (from the miniseries) was not black!  Would casting directors consider casting a white or Asian actor in the part of Malcolm X or Harriet Tubman or Frederick Douglass?  I think not.

I know I risk opening a can of worms (Rita Moreno as a Burmese woman in the King & I, Natalie Wood as a Puerto Rican woman in the original West Side Story, Liz Taylor and Claudette Colbert as Cleopatra - who was Greek), but some recent casting choices are just ridiculous and pandering to various groups rather than focusing on a good movie.  

I look at this type of casting in a specific way--is the race of the historical figure or character central to the story you are telling.  In the case of Malcolm, Harriet and Frederick it is, so the actor needs to reflect it.  The project with Jodie Turner-Smith playing Ann Boleyn, the answer is no.  I have not seen this particular movie or miniseries, but I am going to assume the writers took a lot more liberties with Ann's story than just the color of her skin.  Because historical pieces like this always play fast and loose with established history.  I don't question the casting of Jodie in this case, I do question why someone felt we needed yet another historically inaccurate portrayal of Ann Boleyn when there are other stories to tell.  Henry VII had five other wives who were just as fascinating as Ann in their own way.  

[RealHousewife]

I ditto toilet humor! Not only do I not find it very funny, but I get secondhand embarrassment sometimes.

I'm also not a fan of lots of sex and nudity. It can be tastefully done, but there aren't a ton of family-friendly movies, and I think it's sad. 

Both the above reasons are why I prefer classic movies. I miss movies that are beautifully written and wholesome. My one issue with them is sometimes there's racism. :( As an Audrey Hepburn fan I really liked Breakfast at Tiffany's, but the scenes with Mickey Rooney were terrible. It's amazing to me stuff like that was ever considered okay. 

[magicdog]

8 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

look at this type of casting in a specific way--is the race of the historical figure or character central to the story you are telling.  In the case of Malcolm, Harriet and Frederick it is, so the actor needs to reflect it.  The project with Jodie Turner-Smith playing Ann Boleyn, the answer is no.  I have not seen this particular movie or miniseries, but I am going to assume the writers took a lot more liberties with Ann's story than just the color of her skin.

We have ample evidence of what Anne Bolelyn looked like.  We know she wasn't black.  Why depict a well known historical figure as something they weren't?  I know Hollywood is no stranger to taking creative license with various historical events but I expect that, because you're trying to entertain.  However, this is a matter of completely ignoring facts.  If you're casting a role of an historical figure you want someone who at least vaguely resembles them.  As I said, when will famous black individuals be cast by white or Asian actors?  If that's not going to happen, then they shouldn't be playing fast and loose with casting of historical white figures. 

Edited March 1, 2022 by magicdog

[Trini]

22 minutes ago, magicdog said:

We have ample evidence of what Anne Bolelyn looked like.  We know she wasn't black.  Why depict a well known historical figure as something they weren't?  I know Hollywood is no stranger to taking creative license with various historical events but I expect that, because you're trying to entertain.  However, this is a matter of completely ignoring facts.  If you're casting a role of an historical figure you want someone who at least vaguely resembles them. 

Maybe she was just the best actress for the part? :)

22 minutes ago, magicdog said:

As I said, when will famous black individuals be cast by white or Asian actors?  If that's not going to happen, then they shouldn't be playing fast and loose with casting of historical white figures. 

It's already happened.

[Ohiopirate02]

8 hours ago, magicdog said:

We have ample evidence of what Anne Bolelyn looked like.  We know she wasn't black.  Why depict a well known historical figure as something they weren't?  I know Hollywood is no stranger to taking creative license with various historical events but I expect that, because you're trying to entertain.  However, this is a matter of completely ignoring facts.  If you're casting a role of an historical figure you want someone who at least vaguely resembles them.  As I said, when will famous black individuals be cast by white or Asian actors?  If that's not going to happen, then they shouldn't be playing fast and loose with casting of historical white figures. 

So if this new telling of the Anne Bolelyn story has a six-fingered Anne, an Anne who conspires to poison Catherine of Aragon (a noted redhead even if all cinematic depictions of her have a swarthy "Spanish" coloring) and Cardinal Wosely, or has her actually have sex with her brother George and the rest, you would still think it's greatest sin was having a black woman play Anne?  Because all of those I listed were rumors about Anne that circulated during her reign and after until Elizabeth I took the throne and made them go away.  Biopics always play fast and loose with history in order to create whatever narrative the filmmakers want to tell.  Anne's whiteness is not integral to any telling of her story, her being played by a Black woman does not matter.  The utter travesty known as Mary Queen of Scots with Saoirse Ronan had one of the Four Marys played by a black woman, and that was the least of the production's sins.  

[proserpina65]

23 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I have not seen this particular movie or miniseries, but I am going to assume the writers took a lot more liberties with Ann's story than just the color of her skin.  Because historical pieces like this always play fast and loose with established history.  I don't question the casting of Jodie in this case, I do question why someone felt we needed yet another historically inaccurate portrayal of Ann Boleyn when there are other stories to tell.  Henry VII had five other wives who were just as fascinating as Ann in their own way.  

This.  This right here is what I hate about a lot of historically based movies.  Not necessarily the colorblind casting, but the making shit up about established people.

14 hours ago, Trini said:

Maybe she was just the best actress for the part? :)

Given the number of actresses in Britain, this is unlikely but I'm sure she's a very good actress.

6 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

So if this new telling of the Anne Bolelyn story has a six-fingered Anne, an Anne who conspires to poison Catherine of Aragon (a noted redhead even if all cinematic depictions of her have a swarthy "Spanish" coloring) and Cardinal Wosely, or has her actually have sex with her brother George and the rest, you would still think it's greatest sin was having a black woman play Anne?  Because all of those I listed were rumors about Anne that circulated during her reign and after until Elizabeth I took the throne and made them go away.  Biopics always play fast and loose with history in order to create whatever narrative the filmmakers want to tell.  Anne's whiteness is not integral to any telling of her story, her being played by a Black woman does not matter.  The utter travesty known as Mary Queen of Scots with Saoirse Ronan had one of the Four Marys played by a black woman, and that was the least of the production's sins.  

All of that other stuff is a far bigger problem, imo.  Why not just create a fictional character based on Boleyn and let the narrative run wild?

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 2/28/2022 at 5:03 PM, RealHousewife said:

I'm also not a fan of lots of sex and nudity. It can be tastefully done, but there aren't a ton of family-friendly movies, and I think it's sad. 

You are me with gratuitous violence.  I can't bear it.  I cringe, I look away, sometimes I even feel sick to my stomach.

The amount of violence I can take in a movie is like.... "Speed" from 1994.  LOL.  Something like that.  I really liked the movie "Us" and my brother was shocked that I liked it and I don't know, maybe if the storytelling and everything else is really good I can get around it.  But instances like that are rare.

I don't really have a problem with sex and nudity UNLESS it's all women nude all the time. I can't stand that shit.  I've probably said that way too many times on this forum, LOL.

Edited March 1, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[RealHousewife]

1 minute ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

You are me with gratuitous violence.  I can't bear it.  I cringe, I look away, sometimes I even feel sick to my stomach.

I don't really have a problem with sex and nudity UNLESS it's all women nude all the time. I can't stand that shit.  I've probably said that way too many times on this forum, LOL.

I am definitely more uncomfortable watching violence. I tend to look away too. With sex, it's more like 🤩 unless I'm watching with my parents. ;) Then I don't want to see nothing! Maybe if you grow up with parents who don't make a big fuss it's no big deal, but I grew up with kissing scenes considered risqué. For example, you know I love SATC, but I can't even watch that with my mother. 

Yeah, I see that. Sometimes it's like men will not watch TV shows or movies unless boobs are exposed. You'd think they'd get over it at a certain point.

[Blergh]

Movies that seem to drop f-bombs like every sentence! I've heard them enough at work so why should I PAY extra for them?

[Anduin]

1 hour ago, Blergh said:

Movies that seem to drop f-bombs like every sentence! I've heard them enough at work so why should I PAY extra for them?

Realistic dialogue?

[Laurie4H]

I don’t like cliche kissing scenes (seems to happen on tv more) where the woman jumps up and wraps her legs around the guy.  Done too much and unoriginal.  I wish we can have more scenes like in Rocky.  The fall to the ground kiss.  More romantic.  

Edited March 3, 2022 by Laurie4H

[Shannon L.]

3 hours ago, Laurie4H said:

I don’t like cliche kissing scenes (seems to happen on tv more) where the woman jumps up and wraps her legs around the guy.  Done too much and unoriginal.  I wish we can have more scenes like in Rocky.  The fall to the ground kiss.  More romantic.  

In retrospect, looking at it through today's lens, that scene is really problematic, but I can't help it--when she wraps her arms around him and they slip to the floor?  That's one of the steamiest, best, kiss scenes I've ever seen on film.

Edited March 3, 2022 by Shannon L.

[Blergh]

13 hours ago, Anduin said:

Realistic dialogue?

In a biker bar? Granted. Other places, even now  it's not as frequent  as some movies have had depicted. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by Blergh

[Shannon L.]

On 2/28/2022 at 2:03 PM, RealHousewife said:

I ditto toilet humor! Not only do I not find it very funny, but I get secondhand embarrassment sometimes.

I'm also not a fan of lots of sex and nudity. It can be tastefully done, but there aren't a ton of family-friendly movies, and I think it's sad.

Nudity I'm ok with no matter who I'm watching a movie with.  However, if a sex scene is too explicit and I'm watching with one of my kids, I don't like it much.  We've never been shy or secretive about sex or the human body, but it will always be awkward watching it with my kids. Add masturbation scenes to the list.  I think I hate them even more and I can't really explain why.  If I'm watching a movie with my kids and either of these kinds of scenes come up, I have a hard time relaxing and not being anxious about how many more scenes like it we're going to see before the movie is over. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

2 hours ago, Shannon L. said:

 Add masturbation scenes to the list.  I think I hate them even more and I can't really explain why.  If I'm watching a movie with my kids and either of these kinds of scenes come up, I have a hard time relaxing and not being anxious about how many more scenes like it we're going to see before the movie is over. 

I feel like they've become so popular lately.  The movie "Palm Springs" opens up with one.   There are some things we just plain don't need to see.  And it definitely doesn't help the story along. Palm Springs was about time travel for christ's sake.

I personally hate them because I think that being on a toilet / masturbation /vomit are things that we just plain don't need to see.  The first two are just too intimate.  There are some things that can be kept private.  Vomit is straight up punishing to the viewer and probably makes half of us feel sick ourselves.  You should reward the viewer, not punish us, especially because so many of us are paying to see what you make.

Edited March 4, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Spartan Girl]

Yeah I don’t need to see that sort of thing. And thanks to you guys, I now have South Park’s song about doing that in San Diego in my head! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[Shannon L.]

1 hour ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I feel like they've become so popular lately.  The movie "Palm Springs" opens up with one.   There are some things we just plain don't need to see.  And it definitely doesn't help the story along. Palm Springs was about time travel for christ's sake.

I personally hate them because I think that being on a toilet / masturbation /vomit are things that we just plain don't need to see.  The first two are just too intimate.  There are some things that can be kept private.  Vomit is straight up punishing to the viewer and probably makes half of us feel sick ourselves.  You should reward the viewer, not punish us, especially because so many of us are paying to see what you make.

I don't mind a nicely lit, romantic, love scene with some nudity,  but lately they all seem to be way too explicit for my taste.  I forgot to add oral sex to that list.  I don't need to see that, either. 

[magicdog]

On 3/4/2022 at 3:02 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

You should reward the viewer, not punish us, especially because so many of us are paying to see what you make.

Perfect!!  Send this message to the Hollywood types and put it in big letters!!

[katha]

Not ruins, but always pulls me out of the experience: Actors who look too "modern" in historical settings. You know what I mean: Kevin Costner in medieval Britain, Keanu Reeves trying to be a Victorian. ;-) Perfectly appealing performers in other settings...but no.

I think it's not even the accents, even though everyone focuses on that, it's a modern way of moving and occupying space and somehow not knowing how to wear the clothes in a natural manner that just stands out in contrast to their scene partners as well. Laura Dern in "Little Women" seemed wholly unconvincing to me, and it diminished her presence. Ronan and Pugh, in contrast, looked "right" in the setting. Dern is very good in other stuff, but I was really underwhelmed with her.

In "Last Duel" you have it as well IMO. Comer and Driver seem to fit the time as conceived, no matter how fictionalized, they move and inhabit those clothes/manners as if they were born into it. Damon can't always shed his persona and Affleck is entertainig, but sometimes also totally falling out of the picture.

[magicdog]

1 hour ago, katha said:

Not ruins, but always pulls me out of the experience: Actors who look too "modern" in historical settings.

I agree with this!  I think that's why British/Australian actors tend to do better in these roles;  they have the proper stage training to pull it off, while the Costners, Reeves, Afflecks and Damons are all movie stars but not in the same way.

[Ms Blue Jay]

2 hours ago, katha said:

Not ruins, but always pulls me out of the experience: Actors who look too "modern" in historical settings. You know what I mean: Kevin Costner in medieval Britain, Keanu Reeves trying to be a Victorian. ;-) Perfectly appealing performers in other settings...but no.

All of Kim Basinger's Botox in "The Nice Guys" which is supposed to be set in the 70s.  It's always a mistake to do a period piece if you've got way too much work done.  It's going to distract the audience the whole time.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Ohiopirate02]

Modern face in period pieces does bother me a bit, but this has been happening since film began and it's funny to watch older historic pieces and the changing beauty ideals.  Julie Christie in Doctor Zhivago and Elizabeth Taylor in Cleopatra come to mind.  Then there's Vivian Leigh's eyebrows in Gone With the Wind, and Bette Davis's eyebrows in just about all of her period movies.  

[Ms Blue Jay]

Those things are not going to really bug me as much as major plastic surgery. Personally I don't mind Keanu showing up in period pieces, I think it's awesome.  I practically screamed when he showed up in "Dangerous Liaisons", LOL.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Blergh]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Modern face in period pieces does bother me a bit, but this has been happening since film began and it's funny to watch older historic pieces and the changing beauty ideals.  Julie Christie in Doctor Zhivago and Elizabeth Taylor in Cleopatra come to mind.  Then there's Vivian Leigh's eyebrows in Gone With the Wind, and Bette Davis's eyebrows in just about all of her period movies.  

Let's not overlook Faye Dunaway's 60's flip while starring in the Depression era Bonnie and Clyde! How tough would it have been for them to have told the not-yet-famous performer to get short, tight curls like other Depression era women had had to do!  Of course, it should be noted that the 5 foot 7 inch tall  Miss Dunaway was downright statuesque  compared to the Real Life  4 foot 11 inch tall Bonnie Parker! 

[RealHousewife]

3 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Modern face in period pieces does bother me a bit, but this has been happening since film began and it's funny to watch older historic pieces and the changing beauty ideals.  Julie Christie in Doctor Zhivago and Elizabeth Taylor in Cleopatra come to mind.  Then there's Vivian Leigh's eyebrows in Gone With the Wind, and Bette Davis's eyebrows in just about all of her period movies.  

I love Vivien Leigh and her iconic brows. Most pretty resting B face ever. 

[Bastet]

5 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

It's always a mistake to do a period piece if you've got way too much work done. 

I love that Penny Marshall made the women in A League of Their Own dye their hair (well, Lori Petty had to wear a wig, since her hair is much shorter than women wore it then) because they all had highlights, which weren't a thing in WWII America.  So they all had to pick a solid color.  They also had to learn to bat without gloves, since those weren't worn then, catch with mitts that didn't have webbing, etc.  Marshall even had the field mowed a different way to match how it would have looked at the time.  The little things add up.

[Ms Blue Jay]

^ That's awesome detail that I never thought about even though I've seen that movie many times.

I'm no historian, so the only periods of history I know well are the ones I actually lived through.  LOL!  When I saw Love and Other Drugs I was like uh noooooooooooobody styled their hair like Anne Hathaway does in that movie in the 90s.  Am I right or wrong?  That's the only time I remember thinking that recently, LOL.

Then there's movies where the anachronisms are totally on purpose like "Harlem Nights", so I just sit back and try to enjoy.  I watched Soderbergh's "No Sudden Move" and I don't think it's trying to be anachronistic and I definitely was distracted the whole time thinking that nobody talked like that in the 50s except one character, Mary.  I mean, can you imagine Kieran Culkin acting the way he does in the 50s?  LOL!  Again, maybe it was on purpose?!?!?!

Edited March 10, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Bastet]

2 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

^ That's awesome detail that I never thought about even though I've seen that movie many times.

The best is that the actors had to demonstrate an ability to play baseball in order to even read for a part.  They all underwent training once cast, but there had to be a fundamental athleticism coming in or Penny Marshall wasn't going to bother moving ahead, because she had no interest in having to do clever angles/cuts and/or use doubles to make it look right if by the time they got to shooting she was stuck with someone who couldn't pull off the game scenes; she would only meet with people who could act and play baseball.)  Even Oscar winner Geena Davis's first meeting consisted of Marshall throwing balls at her in the backyard.

Edited March 10, 2022 by Bastet