Well, That Wouldn't Work Now: Things From Movies That Are Outdated or No Longer Politically Correct

[methodwriter85]

On 12/15/2019 at 8:16 PM, starri said:

I was standing in the security line at the airport this morning, and it occurs to me that between cell phones and the massive production that wrangling that many kids through the TSA, there's about no chance that Home Alone could be made today.

The airport scenes in the two "canon" movies are so laughably outdated today. There's no rushing onto a plane with minutes to spare. Hell, in the first movie, the lights causing a power outage wouldn't cause people to miss their alarms, because everybody uses their cell phones for alarms now.

[proserpina65]

13 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

The airport scenes in the two "canon" movies are so laughably outdated today. There's no rushing onto a plane with minutes to spare.

This also applies to any romantic movie where the hero or heroine makes their way to the gate to profess their love to someone they've mooned over for the entire film.  (Love Actually, I'm looking at you.)  TSA regulations would make that impossible now, at least without causing a massive security lockdown and getting the hero/heroine arrested on federal charges.

[Bastet]

16 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

Hell, in the first movie, the lights causing a power outage wouldn't cause people to miss their alarms, because everybody uses their cell phones for alarms now.

I don't, but you're right that it's the first in a sequence of events that would have viewers rolling their eyes if it was made today - at least one person would have their cell phone alarm as back-up if nothing else.  And then the airport stuff, like you said.  The film would barely get going before people were scoffing in their seats.  The premise was ridiculous then, but in a way people rolled with (the appeal of Home Alone has always been lost on me, but it's popular to this day so I am clearly a minority opinion).  Now it just wouldn't work.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Bastet

[Kel Varnsen]

17 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

The airport scenes in the two "canon" movies are so laughably outdated today. There's no rushing onto a plane with minutes to spare. 

I don't know, Everytime I go to the airport I am always hearing announcements about how "this is the final boarding call for passenger x". I imagine those people are probably rushing to the gate. You could probably do 2 with them getting separated post security. But then Kevin getting on another plane might be a bit more difficult, although he is small so I could see him maybe walking by the gate agent and not getting noticed.

3 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

This also applies to any romantic movie where the hero or heroine makes their way to the gate to profess their love to someone they've mooned over for the entire film.  (Love Actually, I'm looking at you.)  TSA regulations would make that impossible now, at least without causing a massive security lockdown and getting the hero/heroine arrested on federal charges.

Well movies like that now usually have a throw away scene where the person goes to the ticket counter and buys the cheapest one way refundable ticket they can get.

[methodwriter85]

With Crazy Rich Asians, I was willing to handwave the airport scene because Nick is supposed to be famous on like a John John level in that particular society.

[Athena]

13 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

With Crazy Rich Asians, I was willing to handwave the airport scene because Nick is supposed to be famous on like a John John level in that particular society.

Nick is not suppose to be famous in Singapore. It's easy to handwave a lot of Nick's stuff due to his family's wealth and connections. In the books, Nick's family owns shares in a bunch of Asian companies including the airline. 

[Nordly Beaumont]

Every New Year's Eve I watch the 1960 movie "The Apartment"because it ends with a New Year's eve (like "When Harry Met Sally" - which I also watch). The premise is pretty yucky. Married executives at an insurance company use Jack Lemmon's apartment to cheat on their wives. The women they cheat with also work at the insurance company as secretaries, switchboard and elevator operators, etc. So it wouldn't fly now (even though I think David Hyde Pierce would be excellent in the Jack Lemmon role!) Like I say, the premise is yucky, but Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine are so great, they make the movie charming.

[xaxat]

10 hours ago, Nordly Beaumont said:

Like I say, the premise is yucky, but Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine are so great, they make the movie charming.

I agree. People remember the eventual romance, but it's a pretty dark movie at points.

[Milburn Stone]

21 hours ago, xaxat said:

I agree. People remember the eventual romance, but it's a pretty dark movie at points.

It's definitely dark, but would it fly now? I think it would. There is no mistaking the movie's deeply moral point of view, that damage is done even when sex is consensual, when what underlies consensual sex is lies. And the protagonist is nothing if not a victim of harassment, even though no one is having sex with him! The darkness of the story is what would allow it to be made today--although of course no one could make it better.

Edited January 3, 2020 by Milburn Stone

[memememe76]

On 12/5/2019 at 2:39 PM, Chaos Theory said:

I am trying to decide if Running on Empty would work today.    Forget the whole Vietnam thing.   I mean it was a time all it’s own.    But it’s more the parents who are basically good people who did a very bad thing raising two kids on the run that might be problematic in today’s market especially with the internet and cellphones.    Plus you would need an “inciting incident” that throws two young parents on the run.  It would need to be bad enough to get the FBI involved but not paint them as villains. 

I think you can do a movie of an undocumented couple with kids who are on the run and hiding. 

[methodwriter85]

I really enjoyed the historical epic The Last of the Mohicans, but I'm not sure "adopted white man who lives the way of Natives" would play that well now, and people would definitely bitch about Cora being played by a white woman. I think she was supposed to be biracial.

I don't think Dances with Wolves would work that well, either.

[Danny Franks]

On ‎1‎/‎26‎/‎2020 at 8:28 AM, methodwriter85 said:

I really enjoyed the historical epic The Last of the Mohicans, but I'm not sure "adopted white man who lives the way of Natives" would play that well now, and people would definitely bitch about Cora being played by a white woman. I think she was supposed to be biracial.

I don't think Dances with Wolves would work that well, either.

It's a great movie, with a wonderful soundtrack, but I think the only thing that would save it for a modern audience would be that it was based on a book. However, I did appreciate that it's Chingachgook, not Hawkeye, who is the titular last of his people.

People often make the assumption that Daniel Day Lewis is playing the title character, just like many assume that Tom Cruise is in The Last Samurai.

[Kel Varnsen]

A few days ago I watched Father of the Bride (because my kids love it for some reason) but it really got me thinking how even if they still made that type of movie, there is no way you could make that movie in it's current form.

I mean maybe it is just me but the concept that the Bride's father pays for the whole wedding seems super old fashioned ( including paying airfare for guests from overseas). But beyond that I don't see how you make a movie where the dad drops 6 figures (in 1991 dollars no less) on a wedding (basically against his will) without the daughter coming across as a spoiled brat. I think just the amount of excess would turn a lot of people off.

[GHScorpiosRule]

34 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

A few days ago I watched Father of the Bride (because my kids love it for some reason) but it really got me thinking how even if they still made that type of movie, there is no way you could make that movie in it's current form.

I mean maybe it is just me but the concept that the Bride's father pays for the whole wedding seems super old fashioned ( including paying airfare for guests from overseas). But beyond that I don't see how you make a movie where the dad drops 6 figures (in 1991 dollars no less) on a wedding (basically against his will) without the daughter coming across as a spoiled brat. I think just the amount of excess would turn a lot of people off.

Based on the many, many, many letters to advice columnists I read, this still happens.

[anna0852]

As an adult, Father of the Bride drives me nuts. 500 plus guests, at $250 a head?! I'd have loved to see George ask Nina which retirement account they were going to drain to pay for it. Or maybe crack the little brother's college fund?

Not to mention physically fitting that many people into their home. How on earth did they not kill their plumbing?

I'm 1000% on George's side about the costs. 

Edited February 9, 2020 by anna0852

[RoxiP]

Every scene from "Something About Mary."

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, anna0852 said:

I'm 1000% on George's side about the costs. 

Team George!  That wedding was ridiculous, and Annie was too immature to get married to begin with.  Of course he winds up having a freakout over hot dog buns; he's living in some sort of bizarro world, where everyone else is nodding along with this batshit crazy wedding planner like this is all completely normal and acceptable.  He got up to his own brand of crazy with the groom's parents, but otherwise whenever the movie asked me to find him irrational, I thought he was the only one still in touch with reality.

 

 

[Kel Varnsen]

7 hours ago, Bastet said:

Team George!  That wedding was ridiculous, and Annie was too immature to get married to begin with.  Of course he winds up having a freakout over hot dog buns; he's living in some sort of bizarro world, where everyone else is nodding along with this batshit crazy wedding planner like this is all completely normal and acceptable.  He got up to his own brand of crazy with the groom's parents, but otherwise whenever the movie asked me to find him irrational, I thought he was the only one still in touch with reality.

 

 

The weird thing is how Annie's character is presented. She is a total down to earth nice person who plays basketball in a fancy dress and also a modern independent career oriented woman. But at the same time she wants a 500 person wedding with a $1200 cake and fucking swans and she expects her dad to pay for it.

[andromeda331]

I love Father of the Bride is one of my favorite movies. I watch it all the time. I love the speech George makes in the beginning about fathers and daughters, saying he was her hero, then hitting the age where she wants you to drop her off a block away, worrying about her meeting the wrong guys, and then worrying about her meeting the right one. His speech about calling when you get there, bed times and etc. I wondered for a moment if who ever wrote that met my parents. I do love the craziness of the wedding. George seeing Annie as a five year old girl and how sad he was after "giving her" away mentioning he had been dreading that for the past five months and the correcting it to 22 years.

Although when you think about it. A lot doesn't make any sense. I agree with you all the cost was ridiculous. The amount of guests and the swans? Or them having to pay to fly out Brian's Danish relatives. Why was it up to George and Nina to pay for seven or eight round trip tickets from Copenhagen? How was that a thing? If they couldn't afford to come that so isn't George's problem? If they couldn't afford to come then they don't come or Brian's parents should be the ones coughing up the money on that one. How was Nina okay with that? I know it was the 90s and apparently George was offended by why exactly was it a bad thing for Brian's parents to chip in too? They clearly that the money to do so and offer. Take them up on it. Or Brian since he's the groom and had a job. Couldn't they meet in the center between a smallish wedding and making it all nice? They do show Annie for a moment looking like when George finds her asleep on the couch with a magazine about baking your own wedding cake and a friend taking the photographs (although the photographer one is one thing you probably shouldn't trust to friends. I've seen that go wrong so many times). But its framed as if George is the bad guy for not letting Annie have the wedding of her dreams.

I do think a remake could happen but this time with the bride and groom chipping in. Its crazy even for the 90s the two decide to get married, Annie just immediately starts planning a big wedding with her mom (despite claiming to want a small one and to keep the costs down) and neither she nor Brian offer or even think about offering to pay anything for their wedding. So the two having jobs and should be paying for something. Maybe the parents' can't afford the big wedding maybe the bride and groom can't either and have that be an underlining plot maybe the parents feel guilt unable to help pay or the daughter a little blue it won't be a big blowout. But then together end up pulling off a nice wedding. 

Also, the couple really needs to date longer while George and Nina do start out being as shocked as they should about their daughter coming home after a few months abroad engaged to someone they have never met. Except for Nina telling George to go talk to Annie after he continues to have the normal reaction and Annie storms out that she's not happy either but worries Annie will take off and marry the guy and they'll never see her. That's it. It just drops.  I don't care how mature your daughter is (which Annie shows signs she really isn't) no parent just accepts her engaged to someone after a few months and plans the wedding. That's just not going to happen. They only just met, they hadn't been dating that long, and Annie was still in college. We're suppose to think George is crazy and over reacting. But for the most part he's right.  Nina's suppose to the calm and sane one but she still helps make the wedding so expensive. 

Annie doesn't make a lot of sense. She's in college but she's mature. Except we never see that part. She's smart and going to be an amazing architect. But decides after a few months to get married. She's shocked and upset by her parents reaction to her news but seems to think only her parents would have an issue with that. She flips out over a blender thinking it means something about Brian's intentions. Ah, shouldn't she already know that before getting engaged? Maybe date a little longer before getting engaged Annie.  She talks about still being independent and her career how getting married isn't going to change that or abandon her dreams. But then completely expects her parents to pay for her wedding. How independent can you be if your doing that? She claims to want a small wedding but then wants a thousand dollar cake and gets mad at her dad for flipping out over the price of the wedding with the "Daddy what is wrong with you?". Ah, Annie what's wrong with you? Your totally okay and expect your parents to shell out 250 a head for your wedding? Cut down the list and cost or start forking over money yourself Miss Independent.

But the part I really hate is we never get to see George enjoy the reception and make any memories from it. His memories are going to be moving cars and long lines. No eating and enjoying the wedding. No talking with friends and/or family, he and Annie never speak and worse of all no father daughter dance. 

Edited February 6, 2020 by andromeda331

[Shannon L.]

I was also on Team George.  When that scene came up where his wife was saying that they don't have fancy cars or expensive jewelry and don't take extravagant vacations had me thinking "That's all well and good, but two college funds and a house of that size in San Marino? That's not cheap"  (The taxes and prices of houses in San Marino were exorbitant even back then).

[scarynikki12]

I do want to say that George's suggestion of having the reception and their favorite restaurant was a good one. So what if it's called The Steak Pit? It's a place they've loved for years and they know the owner by name so there's a legit chance they could have gotten a great deal and everyone would have enjoyed the food.

Anyway, Father of the Bride can be updated so that the focus actually is on how George has a hard time seeing Annie as an adult. And have her behave like an adult to really drive it all home. Make Brian her college boyfriend who she's been dating for years and is liked by her parents, have them both be done with school and in the work force (Brian can stay in IT or whatever it was and I'd update Annie to being in graphic design instead of architecture), and have them insist on paying for the wedding themselves. I'd also have them keep it simple in general and ditch things like the swans. Just have the reception be focused on good food and dancing. The shenanigans really should come from George processing that his baby is all grown up while the wedding is being planned.

I do like a line George has in the movie about being hugged and congratulated by so many people he'd never seen before so I'd want to keep that in any remake cause it makes me laugh.

[methodwriter85]

I've heard talks about rebooting Father of the Bride, but giving it an LGBT twist, either with a gay son or a gay daughter. (Although we'd have to call it Father of the Groom in that case.)

The funny thing is that I'm pretty sure the blender thing was Father of the Bride's attempt at being 90's woke. I mean, it was originally made for a 1950 audience.

I'm not really sure the movie could work for a modern audience unless they significantly rework the Annie character so she doesn't look like a spoiled, flighty, entitled brat.

[andromeda331]

3 hours ago, scarynikki12 said:

I do want to say that George's suggestion of having the reception and their favorite restaurant was a good one. So what if it's called The Steak Pit? It's a place they've loved for years and they know the owner by name so there's a legit chance they could have gotten a great deal and everyone would have enjoyed the food.

Anyway, Father of the Bride can be updated so that the focus actually is on how George has a hard time seeing Annie as an adult. And have her behave like an adult to really drive it all home. Make Brian her college boyfriend who she's been dating for years and is liked by her parents, have them both be done with school and in the work force (Brian can stay in IT or whatever it was and I'd update Annie to being in graphic design instead of architecture), and have them insist on paying for the wedding themselves. I'd also have them keep it simple in general and ditch things like the swans. Just have the reception be focused on good food and dancing. The shenanigans really should come from George processing that his baby is all grown up while the wedding is being planned.

That would be a great idea. I always liked that part of the movie. George having a hard time seeing Annie as an adult but still seeing her as a five year old. 

 

Quote

I do like a line George has in the movie about being hugged and congratulated by so many people he'd never seen before so I'd want to keep that in any remake cause it makes me laugh.

I love that part because its so true. It also always reminds me of my cousin's wedding who decided to have his wedding up in the mountains in a small beautiful old church in the winter. It was really beautiful. Except in all the planning they forgot big detail. Heaters. The church had no heating of its own and no one thought to bring any. For a wedding up in the mountains in the winter. Yep, it was freezing. So everyone was huddling together during the ceremony because it was so cold. After the ceremony when the wedding party formed its line outside to receive guests and everyone was hugging each other instead for warmth whether we knew each other or not.  My cousin and his wife were the only ones who didn't notice how cold it was (I guess when your in love and its your wedding day you don't feel cold?). When it was brought up a few years at a holiday dinner they hosted when they talked about how nice it was to see everyone at their wedding hugging each other and really thought it happened because everyone was being so nice. Our family and his wife's pointed out that we weren't hugging to be nice but for warmth because we were all freezing.  They were really surprised by that. We still tease them about that off and on. Tease them about forgetting the heaters or reminding them that we loved them so much we risked freezing to death for them. Although I suppose it did help to break the ice at the reception (which was thankfully indoors in another location) when you've hugged everyone there for warmth. 

[Kel Varnsen]

On 2/6/2020 at 4:09 AM, andromeda331 said:

But the part I really hate is we never get to see George enjoy the reception and make any memories from it. His memories are going to be moving cars and long lines. No eating and enjoying the wedding. No talking with friends and/or family, he and Annie never speak and worse of all no father daughter dance. 

I kind of hated that part too. For how much George was paying Franc he shouldn't personally be dealing with stuff like parking cars or missing out on dinner or dancing with his daughter or the bouquet toss.

5 hours ago, scarynikki12 said:

Anyway, Father of the Bride can be updated so that the focus actually is on how George has a hard time seeing Annie as an adult. And have her behave like an adult to really drive it all home. Make Brian her college boyfriend who she's been dating for years and is liked by her parents, have them both be done with school and in the work force (Brian can stay in IT or whatever it was and I'd update Annie to being in graphic design instead of architecture), and have them insist on paying for the wedding themselves. I'd also have them keep it simple in general and ditch things like the swans. Just have the reception be focused on good food and dancing. The shenanigans really should come from George processing that his baby is all grown up while the wedding is being planned.

I like that idea for updating it. I would also add that maybe make it so that even though Annie is an adult and is happy with a modest wedding George still is trying to give her the wedding of her dreams (like from when she was a kid). Have it be his internal struggles with that and have it tie back to how he can't see her as an adult. But either way make it so even the dream wedding doesn't cost what a lot of people would spend on a nice house.

3 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

I've heard talks about rebooting Father of the Bride, but giving it an LGBT twist, either with a gay son or a gay daughter. (Although we'd have to call it Father of the Groom in that case.)

The obvious LGBT twist I think is to call it Fathers of the Bride.

[starri]

On 2/7/2020 at 6:48 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

The obvious LGBT twist I think is to call it Fathers of the Bride.

Isn't that just La Cage aux Folles, though?  They've done that in French, English, and on Broadway.

[methodwriter85]

13 hours ago, starri said:

Isn't that just La Cage aux Folles, though?  They've done that in French, English, and on Broadway.

I cannot imagine Agador even happening now. Woah. I think it'd be slammed hard like All from Zoolander 2. 

Edited February 9, 2020 by methodwriter85

[starri]

4 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

I cannot imagine Agador even happening now. Woah. I think it'd be slammed hard like All from Zoolander 2. 

I don't know, given the current popularity, I think casting an actual drag queen (and someone who's actual Latinx) wouldn't get rejected.

Heck, cast Victor Garber and Alec Mapa as the dads, and I could see it being better received than the original.

[methodwriter85]

On 2/9/2020 at 11:16 AM, starri said:

I don't know, given the current popularity, I think casting an actual drag queen (and someone who's actual Latinx) wouldn't get rejected.

Heck, cast Victor Garber and Alec Mapa as the dads, and I could see it being better received than the original.

Not a bad idea. Hank Azaria, God bless him, just looked like a straight white jock making fun of queer Latinos.

[xaxat]

I was reading news about the upcoming projects of intellectual property recycling machine Disney and wondered what won't they remake?

The answer, of course, is Song of the South. Not only will they not remake it, they don't even offer the original on Disney+

[Milburn Stone]

4 minutes ago, xaxat said:

I was reading news about the upcoming projects of intellectual property recycling machine Disney and wondered what won't they remake?

The answer, of course, is Song of the South. Not only will they not remake it, they don't even offer the original on Disney+

They could change Uncle Remus into a highly paid personal assistant on the East Side of Manhattan.

[proserpina65]

2 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

They could change Uncle Remus into a highly paid personal assistant on the East Side of Manhattan.

Okay, I think I'd pay money to see that pitch meeting.

[methodwriter85]

11 hours ago, xaxat said:

I was reading news about the upcoming projects of intellectual property recycling machine Disney and wondered what won't they remake?

The answer, of course, is Song of the South. Not only will they not remake it, they don't even offer the original on Disney+

They're not going to touch Pocohantas, either. The closest we will see to a live action remake of Pocohantas will be the New World movie that New Line did in 2005.

Lindsay Ellis did a fantastic analysis about how Moana was essentially a better version of Pocohantas without the icky implications.

 

[Blergh]

10 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

They're not going to touch Pocohantas, either. The closest we will see to a live action remake of Pocohantas will be the New World movie that New Line did in 2005.

Lindsay Ellis did a fantastic analysis about how Moana was essentially a better version of Pocohantas without the icky implications.

 

Disney's Pocahontas (1995) was SO fictionalized that virtually the ONLY authentic parts of the movie left in was that there were two folks who lived in the early 1600's called Pocahontas and John Smith. Period. 

IF they attempt a dramatization of the actual historic accounts, IMO there'd be no real problems with the movie inasmuch as there doesn't seem to have been any actual evidence of any kind of romance outside of John Smith's imagination. However, it would be somewhat depressing.  This young girl wound up getting captured and imprisoned by these strangers she had befriended and tried to help , got married to another Englishman AND then wound up treated as exotic royalty when visiting England (a hithero almost literal unknown world to her) with a small child in tow before getting upset at the idea of returning to Virginia (and having confronted John Smith for having been a false friend to her people) before finally getting mortally sick and dying while awaiting passage back to Virginia. 

[proserpina65]

8 minutes ago, Blergh said:

Disney's Pocahontas (1995) was SO fictionalized that virtually the ONLY authentic parts of the movie left in was that there were two folks who lived in the early 1600's called Pocahontas and John Smith. Period. 

IF they attempt a dramatization of the actual historic accounts, IMO there'd be no real problems with the movie inasmuch as there doesn't seem to have been any actual evidence of any kind of romance outside of John Smith's imagination. However, it would be somewhat depressing.  This young girl wound up getting captured and imprisoned by these strangers she had befriended and tried to help , got married to another Englishman AND then wound up treated as exotic royalty when visiting England (a hithero almost literal unknown world to her) with a small child in tow before getting upset at the idea of returning to Virginia (and having confronted John Smith for having been a false friend to her people) before finally getting mortally sick and dying while awaiting passage back to Virginia. 

That would be a pretty dark movie.  Not necessarily a bad one, if done properly, but very dark.  And not a cute furry sidekick in sight, so Disney'd be right out.

Edited February 14, 2020 by proserpina65

[Milburn Stone]

1 hour ago, proserpina65 said:

That would be a pretty dark movie.  Not necessarily a bad one, if done properly, but very dark.  And not a cute furry sidekick in sight, so Disney'd be right out.

The cute funny sidekick could be her Spirit Guide.

[Kel Varnsen]

I watched The Goonies with my kids last night (because it is awesome). It got me thinking that if you tried to make a kids movie today where one of the kids was a fat kid named Chunk who was always thinking about food you would get a lot of people complaining.

[starri]

On 6/6/2020 at 10:59 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

I watched The Goonies with my kids last night (because it is awesome). It got me thinking that if you tried to make a kids movie today where one of the kids was a fat kid named Chunk who was always thinking about food you would get a lot of people complaining.

There's a lot in Goonies that wouldn't pass muster today.  I mean, the language alone...

[bmoore4026]

As much as I love Soap Dish, the whole revelation about Montana Moorehead would never fly now due to our growing understanding of trans people.  If they ever did a musical version (because it ain't gettin' remade in a time where soap operas are near extinction), they'd have to change Montana's character entirely.

[Kel Varnsen]

On 6/27/2020 at 10:09 AM, starri said:

There's a lot in Goonies that wouldn't pass muster today.  I mean, the language alone...

I think the language would be easy enough to work around or at least just push the limits of a pg-13 movie. But beyond that you couldn't have a character called Chunk. You absolutely couldn't have Sloth, and probably couldn't have Data. That only leaves two actual Goonies.

[bmoore4026]

Saw The Breakfast Club yesterday.  Liked it but holy cow, are there things that wouldn't fly today, especially in regards to Brian bringing a firearm to school, most everything that Bender does, and Mr. Vernon's treatment of Bender such as physically threatening him and locking him in the supply closet.

Edited July 29, 2020 by bmoore4026

[katha]

On 2/14/2020 at 6:03 PM, Blergh said:

Disney's Pocahontas (1995) was SO fictionalized that virtually the ONLY authentic parts of the movie left in was that there were two folks who lived in the early 1600's called Pocahontas and John Smith. Period. 

IF they attempt a dramatization of the actual historic accounts, IMO there'd be no real problems with the movie inasmuch as there doesn't seem to have been any actual evidence of any kind of romance outside of John Smith's imagination. However, it would be somewhat depressing.  This young girl wound up getting captured and imprisoned by these strangers she had befriended and tried to help , got married to another Englishman AND then wound up treated as exotic royalty when visiting England (a hithero almost literal unknown world to her) with a small child in tow before getting upset at the idea of returning to Virginia (and having confronted John Smith for having been a false friend to her people) before finally getting mortally sick and dying while awaiting passage back to Virginia. 

Yeah, that's basically Malick's "The New World." Her relationship with Smith is fictionalized, but the rest is pretty much that and very depressing. I's a lovely movie, but very sad. Kilcher, Farrell and Bale are great in it, though. With very little dialogue at all.

[bmoore4026]

With more people coming out as asexual or are either heterosexual or homosexual but are unable to find intimate companionship due to certain factors especially being on the Autism Spectrum coupled with more focus on "toxic masculinity" and the qualities for manhood, the whole premise of The 40 Year Old Virgin is downright offensive.  I mean, not everyone is able to find a partner let alone have the ability to foster a relationship.  Not everyone desires or are able to have sex with another person.  So the whole thing about "sex = true manhood" or "if you don't have sex, you're an emotionally stunted loser" is infuriating to me.

[supposebly]

That's why I never watched it. The title was infuriating enough for me.

[Bastet]

I haven't seen it in eons, but wasn't that rather the point of it - that, despite all the shit he got from those (especially the men) around him, there wasn't anything wrong with him not being ready until the right relationship came along at 40, and nothing wrong with him not being quickly ready even within that relationship?

I mostly just remember the chest hair waxing scene (in which the actor really was waxed, and improvised many of the hilariously random holy hell, that hurts reactions) and the scene where he "confesses" being a virgin to his girlfriend, saying he put off consummation because he was afraid it wasn't going to be any good - she says something like, "Of course it'll be good, we love each other," and my eyeballs nearly got stuck in the rolled position.  What a ridiculous and actually harmful lie to perpetuate, that emotional intimacy yields immediate sexual compatibility.

[Scarlett45]

On 8/3/2020 at 4:50 PM, bmoore4026 said:

With more people coming out as asexual or are either heterosexual or homosexual but are unable to find intimate companionship due to certain factors especially being on the Autism Spectrum coupled with more focus on "toxic masculinity" and the qualities for manhood, the whole premise of The 40 Year Old Virgin is downright offensive.  I mean, not everyone is able to find a partner let alone have the ability to foster a relationship.  Not everyone desires or are able to have sex with another person.  So the whole thing about "sex = true manhood" or "if you don't have sex, you're an emotionally stunted loser" is infuriating to me.

I was infuriated about that as well. 

 

On 8/3/2020 at 10:42 PM, Bastet said:

and the scene where he "confesses" being a virgin to his girlfriend, saying he put off consummation because he was afraid it wasn't going to be any good - she says something like, "Of course it'll be good, we love each other," and my eyeballs nearly got stuck in the rolled position.  What a ridiculous and actually harmful lie to perpetuate, that emotional intimacy yields immediate sexual compatibility.

Yeah. I think the movie could’ve saved itself if it actually addressed some of the emotional issues of being an “older virgin” if one doesn’t want to be, how society sees you, the effect on yourself esteem and confidence when you do meet some one, but NO....they did none of that. Not one bit. 

[VCRTracking]

On 8/3/2020 at 2:50 PM, bmoore4026 said:

With more people coming out as asexual or are either heterosexual or homosexual but are unable to find intimate companionship due to certain factors especially being on the Autism Spectrum coupled with more focus on "toxic masculinity" and the qualities for manhood, the whole premise of The 40 Year Old Virgin is downright offensive.  I mean, not everyone is able to find a partner let alone have the ability to foster a relationship.  Not everyone desires or are able to have sex with another person.  So the whole thing about "sex = true manhood" or "if you don't have sex, you're an emotionally stunted loser" is infuriating to me.

The premise is offensive but what the movie does with it isn't IMO. There's a version of this movie(the kind the would make in the 80s) where the main character could've been a pathetic dweeby loser the audience laughs. Andy isn't. He's just a normal nice guy who the audience sympathizes and likes.

 

On 8/3/2020 at 8:42 PM, Bastet said:

I mostly just remember the chest hair waxing scene (in which the actor really was waxed, and improvised many of the hilariously random holy hell, that hurts reactions) and the scene where he "confesses" being a virgin to his girlfriend, saying he put off consummation because he was afraid it wasn't going to be any good - she says something like, "Of course it'll be good, we love each other," and my eyeballs nearly got stuck in the rolled position.  What a ridiculous and actually harmful lie to perpetuate, that emotional intimacy yields immediate sexual compatibility.

Actually it didn't at first. The first time it lasts just a minute. Then she asks "Do you want to try again? And the second time lasts four hours!  Also remember she's a single woman with 2 kids at home who is already a grandmother in her forties. She'd say anything to get that D!

 

On 8/5/2020 at 5:58 PM, Scarlett45 said:

I was infuriated about that as well. 

 

Yeah. I think the movie could’ve saved itself if it actually addressed some of the emotional issues of being an “older virgin” if one doesn’t want to be, how society sees you, the effect on yourself esteem and confidence when you do meet some one, but NO....they did none of that. Not one bit. 

This is a movie that ends with the entire cast singing "The Age of Aquarious" and dancing in a field. I don't think a serious look at the issue was to be found here. 

The "Know How I know you're gay" bit between Rudd and Roger definitely wouldn't be made today!

[proserpina65]

On ‎08‎/‎03‎/‎2020 at 5:50 PM, bmoore4026 said:

So the whole thing about "sex = true manhood" or "if you don't have sex, you're an emotionally stunted loser" is infuriating to me.

Some of us aren't on the spectrum or asexual, and still had trouble finding someone with whom to share that level of intimacy.  So I'm with you.

 

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 7/4/2020 at 4:33 PM, bmoore4026 said:

As much as I love Soap Dish, the whole revelation about Montana Moorehead would never fly now due to our growing understanding of trans people.  If they ever did a musical version (because it ain't gettin' remade in a time where soap operas are near extinction), they'd have to change Montana's character entirely.

Same with Ace Ventura.

I rewatched a favourite from my childhood, "LadyBugs" (1992) and people were really upset on Letterboxd for similar reasons.

Edited August 16, 2020 by Ms Blue Jay

[starri]

15 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I rewatched a favourite from my childhood, "LadyBugs" (1992) and people were really upset on Letterboxd for similar reasons.

That was featured on an episode of How Did This Get Made?, and while I didn't see it when I was the right age, it seemed REALLY problematic.

[methodwriter85]

13 hours ago, starri said:

That was featured on an episode of How Did This Get Made?, and while I didn't see it when I was the right age, it seemed REALLY problematic.

They had two pedophile jokes in the movie that would never fly now for a kid's movie.