Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
methodwriter85

Age in Movies

Recommended Posts

I was watching The Night Before tonight, and as a newly-turned 30-year old, I realized that it had this underlying theme to it- the difficulty of trying to maintain friendships from your youth as you enter your 30's and obligations such as work and family (or your lack thereof) start to separate you from your friends.

 

It made me think about how recent movies tend to depict a person's 30's- basically, as that time between young adulthood and middle age, where you have to to reconcile your younger, wilder self, and accept new responsibilities and that you're no longer a kid. You see that in The Neighbors, Trainwreck, and this one....

 

How do you think movies tend to depict age?

 

I feel like it's changed a little...I feel like 10 years ago, most movies tended to depict a person's 30's as real adulthood time, where you're past all that angst and you're confident (and you're all played by 40-years in botox), but I really feel like there's been at least a couple of movies that tend to depict it as this "in-between" time, between youth and middle age, where you still act like a kid in some ways but you have to learn how to balance that.

Edited by methodwriter85

Share this post


Link to post

I think Judd Apatow and Seth Rogen are changing the image of thirtysomethings in movies thanks to their obsession with (or status as) immature man-children rather than the fully functional adults that most people in their 30s have previously been depicted as.

Share this post


Link to post

Annoying manchild movies aside, I think "the difficulty of trying to maintain friendships from your youth as you enter your 30's and obligations such as work and family (or your lack thereof) start to separate you from your friends." is a good topic, forming new friendships too, choosing to have children later or not at all, and how that has an impact on your socialization.

 

Side note: As someone who hasn't managed to watch a Judd Apatow or Seth Rogen movie, I'm glad Young Adult exists. I'm not calling it a good movie, or a significant movie, or anything. I'm just glad it got made and is out there.

Edited by Crim

Share this post


Link to post

Although with Young Adult, it's more about entering middle-age and how that effects someone who's emotionally 17 while they're nearing on 40. Still, I really liked it.

 

I do feel like THIS image of 30-something doesn't feel like something that gets done that much of anymore:

 

 

It's funny- on T.V., you see plenty of thirty-something (sometimes barely 30-something in the case of Julie Cooper) parents with teenagers, but I feel like most of the time, parents in movies that are in their 30's have little kids or they're expecting their first one.

 

 

I think Judd Apatow and Seth Rogen are changing the image of thirtysomethings in movies thanks to their obsession with (or status as) immature man-children rather than the fully functional adults that most people in their 30s have previously been depicted as.

 

It just kind of felt weird that at 33-34ish, Seth's character in The Night Before was freaking out about having kids. I feel like it would have been more realistic if he already had a toddler or a elementary school kid, and the second kid was prompting his wife to tell him that it was time to stop the tradition.

 

It just made me think about how before, that's how it would have been in a movie (his character should have been like the Paul character in Knocked Up), but you're increasingly seeing 30-somethings depicted as not being settled, or being the first among their friends to be settled down. (Like Seth's character in The Neighbors.)

Edited by methodwriter85

Share this post


Link to post

I saw Sisters recently, which also went with the "growns up who have the mindset of children and need to grow up" theme:

 

 

I really liked that the movie was basically a love letter to children of the 80's who had their coming-of-age during the late 80's/early 1990's. So many really wonderful references to the 80's/early 90's, like Dep, the music, the way the rooms were decorated, etc etc.

 

I did like that it was basically a house party movie, but this time with 40-year olds in the teen roles.

Share this post


Link to post

My theory has always been that the man-child phenomenon, Peter Pan Syndrome, call it what you will, is the direct result of recent generations never having had to go to war.   Immaturity and irresponsibility are luxuries enjoyed by generations that have never had to fight to defend their way of life. 

 

My parents' generation, and those before them, fought in World War I, World War II, and the Korean War.  Those were the wars in which nearly every male of age served, and all of America was with them in spirit.   The impact of the war pervaded our entire culture.

 

When men came home from those wars, they were ready to get on with the way of life they had fought to preserve.   The experience of war had matured them whether they liked it or not.    There was nothing remotely boyish about my father or any other father I knew.   They were men, one and all.   They came back and married in their 20s and started building families immediately.   I think war gave them an appreciation for security and stability.    And a strong sense of duty.

 

I think they would spit on Seth Rogen.   

Share this post


Link to post

I think anybody who really experiences the horror of war and survived it wouldn't wish it on anybody.

 

I agree wartime experience ages and toughens a person

 

A lot of the patriarchs on TV now of the baby boomer age, Zeke played by Craig T. Nelson on Parenthood, Jay played by Ed O'Neill on Modern Family, Tom Selleck on Blue Bloods, Ron Perlman on Sons of Anarchy, Lou played by Keith Carradine(Patrick Wilson as a younger man) on Fargo were all Vietnam vets. They're all different kinds of personalities but they have a masculine authority the next generations lack because of their experiences which they probably wouldn't have if they were objectors or draft dodgers.

Edited by VCRTracking

Share this post


Link to post

My theory has always been that the man-child phenomenon, Peter Pan Syndrome, call it what you will, is the direct result of recent generations never having had to go to war.   Immaturity and irresponsibility are luxuries enjoyed by generations that have never had to fight to defend their way of life. 

 

My parents' generation, and those before them, fought in World War I, World War II, and the Korean War.  Those were the wars in which nearly every male of age served, and all of America was with them in spirit.   The impact of the war pervaded our entire culture.

 

When men came home from those wars, they were ready to get on with the way of life they had fought to preserve.   The experience of war had matured them whether they liked it or not.    There was nothing remotely boyish about my father or any other father I knew.   They were men, one and all.   They came back and married in their 20s and started building families immediately.   I think war gave them an appreciation for security and stability.    And a strong sense of duty.

 

I think they would spit on Seth Rogen.   

You make some interesting points.  But the fact that "they would spit on Seth Rogen" to me would counteract those very qualities that make them mature men.  I also think we have a tendency to glamorize previous generations and think of people as way more virtuous than actual reality.  I think the ideal of stability and family at 22, 23 years old is more a product of the environment than natural desire and a strong sense of maturity. 

 

In my experience I find that older generations that have went to war, never wish that experience on anyone, and tend to be far more supportive of young men enjoying their younger years and getting out and exploring life and not "settling" in so soon.  I think that there can be a happy medium, and just because you are a "fun, outrageous" personality doesn't mean that you are a bad person and/or hurting others. 

 

As much as we like to use Seth Rogen as an example, he is a happily married man who has been with the same woman for years.  Left home at seventeen, came to the U.S. and began using his talents as a writer behind the scenes, working his way up, way before he was an onscreen talent.  He also uses his fame to fundraise for Alzheimer's research.  I think he may have a lot more in common with the older generations of men than we give him credit for.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Do you think the points made here help us be more comfortable with the fact that so manyl twenty and thirty-something women in modern movies end up with men 15 - 30 years their senior?

Share this post


Link to post

Do you think the points made here help us be more comfortable with the fact that so manyl twenty and thirty-something women in modern movies end up with men 15 - 30 years their senior?

 

I guess it depends on your definition of the word 'comfortable'.

 

In her autobiography In The Frame, Helen Mirren wrote that when she and Liam Neeson dated in the 80's after meeting on the set of Excalibur, she wondered whether or not the relationship would last because Neeson was all of eight years younger than she was. I mean, I guess you could argue that it was different back then, or that it's different for women, but to me eight years is hardly any difference at all. That's why the term 'age-appropriate' bothers me, because who decides what's appropriate and what isn't? Me? You (the general you)? Society in general?

 

Interesting to think that perpetual movie stoner and man-child Seth Rogen is actually a solid person behind the scenes. But then again, Bing Crosby was supposed to be a decent family man and not someone who may (or may not have, depending on which kid you believe) knocked the shit out of his children.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

And then there's Bill Cosby!

 

In her autobiography In The Frame, Helen Mirren wrote that when she and Liam Neeson dated in the 80's after meeting on the set of Excalibur, she wondered whether or not the relationship would last because Neeson was all of eight years younger than she was.

Which is funny because  Liam later marries Natasha Richardson who is 11 years younger than him! Neeson mentions Helen in a 1999 Movieline interview:

 

Q: You've credited Helen Mirren with first introducing you to a sophisticated world. How important was she in your development?

A: Helen taught me there's more to life than meat, vegetables and potatoes on a plate. Literally, I had my first Chinese meal with her. I was with her in London and we went to meet some of her friends in a restaurant bar and there were all these beautiful English socialites chatting away and pulling the heads off shrimps. I'd never seen a shrimp before. I was filled with a feeling of total inadequacy. Helen showed me how to do it.

 

 

Edited by VCRTracking
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I finally got around to seeing Diner (1982), which focuses on a group of childhood friends who are now in their 20's, during the last week of 1959 in Baltimore. I honestly thought it was great depiction of that age...way better than Reality Bites was.

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just got out of seeing Hello, My Name Is Doris, and I gotta say, I really enjoyed it. In some ways, I felt like cringing throughout the movie as Doris sets off on this quixotic quest to get with Schmidt from New Girl, but they did a good job of making her eccentric without making her a sad old lady joke.

 

I really thought they were going to have a scene where the young people make fun of her for trying to hang out with them, but I really like that they avoided doing anything like that, and showing that young people CAN be friends with older people. It does happen.

 

It's also really nice to see that Sally Field has let herself age and hasn't turned herself into a creepy, wrinkle-free reminder of what used to be Sally Field as opposed to certain other celebrities. Although it's kind of funny that she really hasn't had to do what Catherine Deneuve said about having to chose between your face or your ass- she's still pretty lithe (although I doubt she's keeping herself at 90 pounds like she did during the 70's) and her face looks great!

Edited by methodwriter85

Share this post


Link to post

Some runs a blog about showing pictures of adult actors in teen roles (and photos of them as actual teenagers), with Bianca Lawson as the patron saint. They also started a flip-side, about young actors playing older. (I think we can all guess who the patron saint is of that!)

It does make you think about how much age casting processes skews age in movies. Sometimes you have fake teenagers that are really, really good at it (see: Bel Powley in Diary of A Teenage Girl), but you also get Robbie Amell trying to play 17 in The Duff and just looking really, really ridiculous. 

I'm actually kind of surprised about Amell. I always thought he was going to be one of those guys who looked really young for a long time. But age really seemed to catch up to him by the time he did The Tomorrow People. Mae Whitman, of course, still can very believably play a teenager, although I'm wondering if the Duff might have been her "goodbye" to teen roles. She has to be really sick of them at this point.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

At least in 21 Jump Street people were calling out Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill for looking ridiculously old for high school students.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Which was funny, because they were right next to Dave Franco, who is only 4 and 2 years younger than Channing/Jonah but still pretty much pulled off high school.

Bad Moms was basically a teen mean girl movie, but wrapped into motherhood. Kind of like how Sisters was a teen party movie, but wrapped into the worries of middle-age.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

From the Wat Are You Reading thread in the Books section, since I wasn't sure where else to put it.

On 8/1/2016 at 11:00 PM, Rick Kitchen said:

Finally got around to start reading Ready Player One.  Really like it so far.  The 80s trivia is strong with this one.  I read that Steven Spielberg will be removing all references to his works out of the movie, in order to avoid being accused of playing favorites.  I think Tye Sheridan is too old and too good looking for the part, unless he's just going to be an avatar through the whole thing.

Was Wade's age ever mentioned in the book? It's been a couple of years since I read it, but Tye Sheridan is only nineteen. I don't know about too good-looking, but I am kind of morbidly fascinated by the idea that he's already aging out of roles before he's twenty. :-P

Edited by Cobalt Stargazer

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

From the Wat Are You Reading thread in the Books section, since I wasn't sure where else to put it.

Was Wade's age ever mentioned in the book? It's been a couple of years since I read it, but Tye Sheridan is only nineteen. I don't know about too good-looking, but I am kind of morbidly fascinated by the idea that he's already aging out of roles before he's twenty. :-P

He's in high school when he finds the first Key.  And it took him five years to find it.  And Wade describes himself as fat.

Share this post


Link to post

Still very fucking bitter about hunky 25-year old Jonah in The Giver. I probably should watch it because people have said it's actually not bad, but I want to preserve the memories of 9-year old me falling in love with the book.

The problem with making Jonah sixteen instead of 12 is that he's basically a young adult at that point, instead of a child entering into a young adulthood. I hated that they did that so, so much.

It's the like the Sandlot. You can't make that movie with kids who are already teenagers. It only works with people in that 11/12 range, when you're still a little kid but you're starting to venture out into a more adult way of looking at world, as explored beautifully with Inside Out.

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm coming in two weeks late with this, but yeah, you gotta love Cara Delevigne continuing the grand tradition of ingenues playing professional women that they are far too young to play in Suicide Squad!

Only in the movies can you be a seasoned archaeologist, complete with the doctorate title, while having a fresh college co-ed face!

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think what would of helped would of been some character development, instead they put her hair in a bun and put her in glasses. See, she is "smart and a doctor".  Apparently they thought that was enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think my favorite in that vein was Kate Bosworth playing seasoned reporter Lois Lane with a school-aged son.

See, sometimes you can PULL it off- I thought Scarlett Johansson did a very credible 24 while really being 17-18 in Lost In Translation. On the other end, you get Julia Stiles as a politician's wife in the Omen remake- had it been rewritten in that she was his young trophy wife like they did with J-Law in American Hustle, it could have made sense, but as someone put it, putting her with Liev was less "darling, I can't go on with this marriage", and more, "Gee, Mr. Schrieber, I would do ANYTHING to pass chemistry, and I mean ANYTHING."

Like, Margot Robbie looks old enough that I can buy her as someone that was a shrink. She seems mature. Cara Delevigne should be sticking to teen and college roles right now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, spaceytraci1208 said:

I'm watching Grease, and while clearly none of the cast are teenagers, the actress playing "Cha-Cha" looks a smooth 37...

She really did look like the oldest, and that was saying something for that cast.

I thought they did a great job with making Sandy look young, until they got to the Greaser Sandy. Both in the original, and the t.v. live musical.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Let me preface my statement with a podcast title that reflects my sentiments: Denzel Washington Is The Greatest Actor of All Time, Period. 

That being said, it does bother me that Denzel is always paired with younger women. When he was younger himself (30s), his wives and girlfriends were in their 20s, and even in his 50s-60s, his wives/girlfriends are significantly younger. What's that famous adage? Hollywood allows its male actors to age but not so much its female actors. 

I laughed out loud at the 2003 movie Out of Time when Denzel (age 49 at the time) played a police chief who'd supposedly gone to high school with Sanaa Lathan (32) and Eva Mendes (29). The script--and one of the characters--said he'd been a senior when they were freshmen. Yeah, right.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, topanga said:

What's that famous adage? Hollywood allows its male actors to age but not so much its female actors. 

I laughed out loud at the 2003 movie Out of Time when Denzel (age 49 at the time) played a police chief who'd supposedly gone to high school with Sanaa Lathan (32) and Eva Mendes (29). The script--and one of the characters--said he'd been a senior when they were freshmen. Yeah, right.

I remember hearing it phrased: Women grow old; men grow distinguished.

More like pushing towards senior citizenship. I'm not at all against May-December romances (I'd be a total hypocrite if I were, because loads of my favorite crushes have been over 20 years older than I was and am at the time), but since it's become the standard in Hollywood, it's so eye-roll inducing and frustrating. Women don't disappear after 32 and pop back up again in their late 50's/early 60's to be someone's grandma with grandpa totally being played by some guy in his 80's.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

More like pushing towards senior citizenship. I'm not at all against May-December romances (I'd be a total hypocrite if I were, because loads of my favorite crushes have been over 20 years older than I was and am at the time), but since it's become the standard in Hollywood, it's so eye-roll inducing and frustrating. Women don't disappear after 32 and pop back up again in their late 50's/early 60's to be someone's grandma with grandpa totally being played by some guy in his 80's.

This Mad TV skit SKEWERED that back in the 90's. Still very, very true. Although it does seem like now, the older 40-plus guys are expected to keep up their hunk bods, like Denzel, Liam Neeson Daniel Craig, Hugh Jackman, Tom Cruise, etc etc. Even if Mel Gibson hadn't gone crazy, I don't think he would have been allowed to keep leading man status because he aged so horribly.

It's like you can put Jennifer Lawrence with Bradley Cooper and it doesn't look bad. If you put her with someone like John Travolta or any other older guy that doesn't sport a six--pack, it won't look right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

FWIW, Leonardo DiCaprio turned 42 on the eleventh of this month, making him a few months older than Cooper, and though people make jokes about him having dadbod, I think he can still pull off co-starring with younger women. He's no longer the "pretty" boy he was twenty-some years ago, but he hasn't totally let himself go.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

Even if Mel Gibson hadn't gone crazy, I don't think he would have been allowed to keep leading man status because he aged so horribly.

I agree, though I've always wondered if the former heavily influenced the latter. 

I think Denzel aged better than most leading men, so it wasn't as visually dissonant to see him with younger women for awhile.  At least for me.  But Flight promptly ended that. And yet, Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta-Jones in Entrapment was unintentional comedy for me.  

20 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

Although it does seem like now, the older 40-plus guys are expected to keep up their hunk bods, like Denzel, Liam Neeson Daniel Craig, Hugh Jackman, Tom Cruise, etc etc.

 I'm trying to think of the last time Denzel was shirtless for a role...I wouldn't necessarily put him in with this group.  Even in his later action films, he's usually clothed.  It seems that a lot of the pressure to stay fit is due to being an action lead.  Whereas women are almost always expected to be attractive, regardless of genre. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

True. I kind of wonder if part of the reason why Daniel Craig is so sick of James Bond is because he's getting tired of trying to maintain that bod while he's pushing 50.

Leo has a young face. He can still reasonably play someone in their mid-30's. I think he's generally immune to criticism about his body because he's not an action star and his movie roles tend to be quirkier than straight, conventional leading man roles. He was never really the "hunk"- even in his Romeo/Jack Dawson days, it was more about his boyish charm than him having a hard body.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/18/2016 at 8:26 AM, Popples said:

I remember hearing it phrased: Women grow old; men grow distinguished.

More like pushing towards senior citizenship. I'm not at all against May-December romances (I'd be a total hypocrite if I were, because loads of my favorite crushes have been over 20 years older than I was and am at the time), but since it's become the standard in Hollywood, it's so eye-roll inducing and frustrating. Women don't disappear after 32 and pop back up again in their late 50's/early 60's to be someone's grandma with grandpa totally being played by some guy in his 80's.

This nonsense is nothing new; in fact, it has been going on since the days of silent film. Cinema legend Lillian Gish, whose career spanned 80 years or more, had this to say: 

"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."

This still goes on to some degree, and it's just ridiculous. For instance, why is Tom Cruise playing the leading man in the upcoming The Mummy remake instead of, you know, the titular mummy? He's 9 years older than Boris Karloff was when Karloff played the mummy in 1932! Hell, he's 23 years older than Brendan Fraser was as the leading man in 1999 version! 

If actresses are forced to realize they are "of a certain age" and need to play more age-appropriate roles, than the same should apply to actors. Robert Redford? You're too old to play Bill Bryson now, much less the 40-something Bryson in A Walk in the Woods (I'm still pissed at the idiotic aging up), you should have set the movie in the 90s and cast a 40-something actor. Cruise? You were college-aged when your current crop of leading ladies were born, maybe you should start playing dads to college students or older (don't you dare tell me he's too young).

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

This still goes on to some degree, and it's just ridiculous. For instance, why is Tom Cruise playing the leading man in the upcoming The Mummy remake instead of, you know, the titular mummy? He's 9 years older than Boris Karloff was when Karloff played the mummy in 1932! Hell, he's 23 years older than Brendan Fraser was as the leading man in 1999 version! 

Holy crap! 23 years?! Yeah, he needs to be the new main character's dad.

I can't remember where I heard this recently (I apologize if it was somewhere on this board and I'm not giving the proper person credit), but someone pointed out that Tom Cruise (54) now is older than Wilford Brimley was in Cocoon (51). I'll be honest, I thought Wilford Brimley was much older than that at the time, but that fact blew my mind.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, Popples said:

 

I can't remember where I heard this recently (I apologize if it was somewhere on this board and I'm not giving the proper person credit), but someone pointed out that Tom Cruise (54) now is older than Wilford Brimley was in Cocoon (51). I'll be honest, I thought Wilford Brimley was much older than that at the time, but that fact blew my mind.

I never get tired of reading this piece of trivia, because I'm a petty little so-and-so.

I remember on a board someone lamenting that Tom Cruise was "losing parts to Ryan Gosling". I tell you, I never laughed so bitterly in all my life. First of all, Gosling doesn't make nearly the volume of movies Cruise makes in a year, so Cruise has nothing to worry about. Second, is there any evidence at all that Cruise has lost particular roles to Gosling? I would think that would be a reasonably big deal. Third, even if that was true (which I doubt)... I have no sympathy. None. Why? Because then and only then would Cruise know what it's like to be an actress over 40 (or, hell, over 30). 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

If actresses are forced to realize they are "of a certain age" and need to play more age-appropriate roles, than the same should apply to actors. Robert Redford? You're too old to play Bill Bryson now, much less the 40-something Bryson in A Walk in the Woods (I'm still pissed at the idiotic aging up), you should have set the movie in the 90s and cast a 40-something actor. Cruise? You were college-aged when your current crop of leading ladies were born, maybe you should start playing dads to college students or older (don't you dare tell me he's too young).

In Cruise's case, I think becoming a nutty Scientologist has something to do with whatever downswing his career has taken. I know that the public view of him has certainly changed since he jumped up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch yammering about how much he loved Katie Holmes, and that "only" happened eleven years ago when he was in his early forties. A little over a decade later, IMO that's what stands out. Forget his age, leaving shoe marks on Oprah's stage sofa is more memorable. And unlike Mel Gibson, he's aged reasonably well, although you can tell that he's got some mileage on him. No, he doesn't look the same way he did ten years ago, but who does? The irony is,, if he'd taken the Burt Reynolds route we'd be making fun of him for trying to maintain his "hot" image. And ask Meg Ryan how plastic surgery worked out for her.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

This still goes on to some degree, and it's just ridiculous. For instance, why is Tom Cruise playing the leading man in the upcoming The Mummy remake instead of, you know, the titular mummy? He's 9 years older than Boris Karloff was when Karloff played the mummy in 1932! Hell, he's 23 years older than Brendan Fraser was as the leading man in 1999 version! 

*tosses laptop at Wiendish* I cannot stop laughing!

I like Tom Cruise as an actor, but you're right - it's ridiculous.  I think he set himself up very well several years ago, so he can pretty much make any movie he wants, no matter how absurd.  I enjoy his Mission: Impossible films, but the last two have been been a strain on my suspension of disbelief.  Tom isn't going anywhere as long as his can finance his own films, so we have more Cruise inanity in store!

18 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

I kind of wonder if part of the reason why Daniel Craig is so sick of James Bond is because he's getting tired of trying to maintain that bod while he's pushing 50.

That, and the injuries endured while filming.  He's the most physical Bond to date, for sure. Compare Craig's films to something like Sean Connery's Goldfinger, where his Bond did virtually nothing the entire film beyond flirting and smirking. I could see Craig doing little beyond independent films after Bond.  He's looking rough, and he's financially set for life.  It's what I would do. Craig also seems to be among the few men who publicly acknowledge the older man/ever younger woman trope. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Did anyone else think while watching Sarah Jessica Parker's Failure to Launch that we were supposed to buy her as being in her late 20's/early 30's? I just got the feeling we were supposed to think she was younger than her age at the time (40-ish), especially with Zooey Deschanel being her roommate. Or was she supposed to be 35-ish like Matthew's character? Either way, it felt like the character wasn't her real age.

It definitely felt like Zooey, Bradley, and Justin Bartha were all there to kind of make these two characters seem a little younger and more happening. Very common tactic but it can get really eye-rolling. Like when we were supposed to buy that Ben Affleck and Blake Lively were contemporaries in The Town. Yo Hollywood, taking your middle-aged star and casting 25-year olds to play their best friends/peers/love interests doesn't make them look 25!

Quote

You were college-aged when your current crop of leading ladies were born, maybe you should start playing dads to college students or older (don't you dare tell me he's too young).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the only time Tom Cruise has played the father to a young adult was in the War of the Worlds, and that was to a guy in his early 20's trying to play 16. After that he either hasn't played a dad or it's always a dad to a young kid and not someone in even their teens.

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Love everyone's comments, my suspension of belief happened with Meet the Browns, a Tyler Perry movie starring Angela Bassett. Now I love Angela Bassett but everytime someone in the film mentioned that young mothers like her need help or are inexperienced it took me right out of the movie considering Ms. Bassett was 50 years old at the time. I know she looks good for her age but come on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 2016-11-20 at 11:16 AM, Cobalt Stargazer said:

In Cruise's case, I think becoming a nutty Scientologist has something to do with whatever downswing his career has taken. I know that the public view of him has certainly changed since he jumped up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch yammering about how much he loved Katie Holmes, and that "only" happened eleven years ago when he was in his early forties. A little over a decade later, IMO that's what stands out. Forget his age, leaving shoe marks on Oprah's stage sofa is more memorable. And unlike Mel Gibson, he's aged reasonably well, although you can tell that he's got some mileage on him. No, he doesn't look the same way he did ten years ago, but who does? The irony is,, if he'd taken the Burt Reynolds route we'd be making fun of him for trying to maintain his "hot" image. And ask Meg Ryan how plastic surgery worked out for her.

The problem is that Tom Cruise is still profitable outside of the USA. Most of his blockbusters get mediocre turnouts in the USA, but they make their budget and more in Asia and even Europe. He spends a lot of time shilling and doing PR in China now. The Scientology stuff was never really part of his global image brand. In North America, the Oprah show and his divorce from Holmes were much more scrutinized.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Athena said:

The problem is that Tom Cruise is still profitable outside of the USA. Most of his blockbusters get mediocre turnouts in the USA, but they make their budget and more in Asia and even Europe. He spends a lot of time shilling and doing PR in China now. The Scientology stuff was never really part of his global image brand. In North America, the Oprah show and his divorce from Holmes were much more scrutinized.

Well after he fired his publicist (or did she quit?) who did a real good job of keeping his mouth shut from spouting his whackadoodle Scientology "advice" going as far as saying vitamins could cure Post Partum Depression, getting into it with Brooke Shields over it, I'd say that for awhile, Scientology was a part of his image that was scrutinized. He didn't do himself any favors in that Today interview. I'm sure there were others, but that's the only one that comes to mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Well after he fired his publicist (or did she quit?) who did a real good job of keeping his mouth shut from spouting his whackadoodle Scientology "advice" going as far as saying vitamins could cure Post Partum Depression, getting into it with Brooke Shields over it, I'd say that for awhile, Scientology was a part of his image that was scrutinized. He didn't do himself any favors in that Today interview. I'm sure there were others, but that's the only one that comes to mind.

There were lots of incidents after he fired Pat Kingsley, his ex publicist who did tell him to cool it with the scientology. His image in the US has recovered a little bit, but he does not get the kind of box office draws that he use to and his movies don't do as well as other action franchises anymore. However, all of these incidents were under reported globally or they don't really care about his scientology stuff. It kinda annoys me how he still makes a lot of money internationally and people don't seem to be "over" him abroad than he is at home. International box office is more important for big action movies now so he's still doing well there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the only time Tom Cruise has played the father to a young adult was in the War of the Worlds, and that was to a guy in his early 20's trying to play 16. After that he either hasn't played a dad or it's always a dad to a young kid and not someone in even their teens.

I believe you're correct. Justin Chatwin is 34 now, so he'd have been 23 when War of the Worlds was made, and I don't think Cruise has ever portrayed a dad to anyone of any age other than that. Unless you count Jerry Maguire, with Renee Zellweger's kid, and I kind of don't because her squinchy face is really annoying to me.[/petty]

 

2 hours ago, Athena said:

The problem is that Tom Cruise is still profitable outside of the USA. Most of his blockbusters get mediocre turnouts in the USA, but they make their budget and more in Asia and even Europe. He spends a lot of time shilling and doing PR in China now. The Scientology stuff was never really part of his global image brand. In North America, the Oprah show and his divorce from Holmes were much more scrutinized.

Oh, well, worldwide is a different matter, and I think that's a sign of cultural differences. Speaking very generally, Americans watch a lot of television, and the pop culture stuff can be kind of hard to get away from sometimes. *glares at the Kardashians* If you want a comparison, and with apologies to @GHScorpiosRule, look at Tom Hiddleston. He spent five minutes being Taylor Swift's plus-one, and I don't think I'll be able to take him completely seriously for a while after the break up. That's perception and not necessarily reality, but there it is. Had Cruise not fired his publicist, how "off" he is might never have become fodder for gossip.

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Speaking very generally, Americans watch a lot of television, and the pop culture stuff can be kind of hard to get away from sometimes. *glares at the Kardashians* If you want a comparison, and with apologies to @GHScorpiosRule, look at Tom Hiddleston. He spent five minutes being Taylor Swift's plus-one, and I don't think I'll be able to take him completely seriously for a while after the break up. That's perception and not necessarily reality, but there it is. 

I don't hold Hiddleston's very very brief thing with Swift against him. All that matters to me is that it ended; and even if it hadn't, it wouldn't have affected how I see him as an actor - because he's a damned good one as far as I'm concerned. No scandal or craziness or the likes of Cruise or Gibson, which would be a deal breaker.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just think it's funny that Tom Cruise spent his youth trying to be (and sometimes succeeding) a serious actor and now that he's at that age where there are so many serious actor roles out there, he's trying to be an action star playing (at least) 10 years younger than his actual age.

It really does come down to Box Office and perception. You can sell action movies worldwide and worldwide is where he's still a star. If he went after those serious roles, they'd primarily be looking at the North American Market and that's where he can't open a movie like he used to. No reason Tom Cruise couldn't pull off a movie like Flight or Bridge of Spies or Allied except studios know that his name won't open a movie the way Brad Pitt or Tom Hanks or Denzel Washington will anymore in North America.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎11‎/‎20‎/‎2016 at 6:19 PM, methodwriter85 said:

Did anyone else think while watching Sarah Jessica Parker's Failure to Launch that we were supposed to buy her as being in her late 20's/early 30's? I just got the feeling we were supposed to think she was younger than her age at the time (40-ish), especially with Zooey Deschanel being her roommate. Or was she supposed to be 35-ish like Matthew's character? Either way, it felt like the character wasn't her real age.

It definitely felt like Zooey, Bradley, and Justin Bartha were all there to kind of make these two characters seem a little younger and more happening. Very common tactic but it can get really eye-rolling. Like when we were supposed to buy that Ben Affleck and Blake Lively were contemporaries in The Town. Yo Hollywood, taking your middle-aged star and casting 25-year olds to play their best friends/peers/love interests doesn't make them look 25!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the only time Tom Cruise has played the father to a young adult was in the War of the Worlds, and that was to a guy in his early 20's trying to play 16. After that he either hasn't played a dad or it's always a dad to a young kid and not someone in even their teens.

That was actually one of my favorite things about Failure to Launch.  I saw it as more of trying to counter that stereotype that everyone's friends are all the same age and that people aren't close to or don't live with people who are more than two years above and below them.  I live in LA and lots of people find themselves living in roommate situations because it gives you an opportunity to live in better neighborhoods in LA county.  I have lived with people ranging from above and below 10 years of my own age.

Share this post


Link to post

I love Failure to Launch , but that age stuff is very noticeable to me.  The whole point of the movie is that Matthew's character refuses to grow up and is far too old to be behaving as he does (living with his parents for no financial reason!!!!!) but Sarah's character is just as strange.  SJP was 41 in FTL -- I guess that's not an insane age to have a roommate, I don't know.  I assume FTL takes place in LA....  I wouldn't know the situation there.  In Toronto, real estate is notoriously overpriced but I would still think it strange for a 41 year old to have a roommate.  Zooey Deschanel was 26 at the time of FTL.  

Hey, something great about FTL is that Sarah Jessica Parker is actually 4 year older than her male love interest, Matthew McConaughey!!

Edited by Ms Blue Jay
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

In LA, 41 isn't to old to have a roommate.  I actually don't know what that cut off would be, but as an LA resident it is all about location.  I have a roommate who is in his 40's, I also live with other roommates who range from late twenties to early forties.  We also live in a great neighborhood, big house, in one of the best neighborhoods in town.  There is enough space for all of us and we have great outdoor space to entertain as well. Depending on your situation it is worth it to some of us to live in great safe locations that offer us a certain amount of amenities that one cannot afford by living by one self. 

SJP's character, an unmarried woman, with no children, who lives with close friends in a nice house/apartment in a great part of town is not unusual for LA. Also for those that don't know LA very well it can be a very lonely place to live in a lot of ways.  There are other reasons besides financial that people chose to live with one another.  LA is made up of mostly transplants, so living with someone is a great way to help acclimate you to the city before you sort of find your "way" in Los Angeles.

Share this post


Link to post

True, but I still got the feeling that we were supposed to see them as being "peers".

Anyway, I've been saying for awhile now that I think Jennifer Lawrence playing so many characters older than her is going to bite her in the ass someday...I talked to someone who thought Haley Bennett looked like a "much younger" Jennifer Lawrence.

Haley Bennett is 2 years older. I really think JLaw's going to run into a Mrs. Robinson/Anne Bancroft problem, where she gets perceived as "old" before her time.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×