|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,305
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,305 |
Thanks everyone for a lively discussion about this movie. I think we've covered and uncovered just about all aspects of it.
For those who haven't seen it and who are thinking about seeing it, IMHO, it's a wonderful chick flick, and I don't regret seeing it for a minute.
I appreciate the people who managed to post respectfully even when they didn't agree with my views. That says a lot to me. Thanks but NO THANKS!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986 |
it's a wonderful chick flick, and I don't regret seeing it for a minute. and this speaks to me.  **shrug** 
Widowed 11/10/12 after 35 years of marriage
*********************
“In a sense now, I am homeless. For the home, the place of refuge, solitude, love-where my husband lived-no longer exists.” Joyce Carolyn Oates, A Widow's Story
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,423
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,423 |
I, too, enjoyed the lively discussion even though I didn't chime in. I saw the tv show, kinda hit and miss, and have not seen the movie YET.
And, Pep, GREAT posts. It's nice to see that some don't have tunnel vision and can see the bigger picture, recognizing the redemption.
Fox
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,278
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,278 |
Thanks everyone for a lively discussion about this movie. I think we've covered and uncovered just about all aspects of it.
For those who haven't seen it and who are thinking about seeing it, IMHO, it's a wonderful chick flick, and I don't regret seeing it for a minute.
I appreciate the people who managed to post respectfully even when they didn't agree with my views. That says a lot to me. I'm going to see it and I'm not a big chick flick fan. I am glad not too much was revealed so I can still have some surprises. Yep, it's been intewesting. Vewy intewesting!  And fun!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,736
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,736 |
Pep,
I think it's intellectually dishonest to separate the movie from the TV series.
The movie is just another episode in the series, and the series had affairs as part of it's plot.
Your argument about the movie being treated separately is like the WS who tells her husband that she is home with him, so her unfaithfulness last night was meaningless.
One must look at the whole body of work.
The affair in the movie may be well handled. However, that doesn't negate the fact that the series included some very non-MB appropriate behavior.
I think both of those are valid points of discussion. One can examine the nature of how the affair in the movie was handled and still call the overall series very anti-MB.
Both are valid points of view.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,305
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,305 |
Pep,
I think it's intellectually dishonest to separate the movie from the TV series.
The movie is just another episode in the series, and the series had affairs as part of it's plot.
Your argument about the movie being treated separately is like the WS who tells her husband that she is home with him, so her unfaithfulness last night was meaningless.
One must look at the whole body of work.
The affair in the movie may be well handled. However, that doesn't negate the fact that the series included some very non-MB appropriate behavior.
I think both of those are valid points of discussion. One can examine the nature of how the affair in the movie was handled and still call the overall series very anti-MB.
Both are valid points of view. Absolutely WONDERFUL post EE!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,278
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,278 |
I think it's intellectually dishonest to separate the movie from the TV series.
The movie is just another episode in the series, and the series had affairs as part of it's plot When the powers that be decide that there will be a movie made from a TV series, they look at all aspects. On of the requirements is that the movie must be able to STAND ON ITS OWN to entice those who did not watch the TV series so that they can sell more tickets, thus sell more popcorn and soda and so on and so on. Profit, profit, profit! (While also attracting the original fans, of course.) Therefore I have to disagree with your take because it is SUPPOSED to be separate. Charlotte
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986 |
I think it's intellectually dishonest to separate the movie from the TV series.
The movie is just another episode in the series, and the series had affairs as part of it's plot When the powers that be decide that there will be a movie made from a TV series, they look at all aspects. On of the requirements is that the movie must be able to STAND ON ITS OWN to entice those who did not watch the TV series so that they can sell more tickets, thus sell more popcorn and soda and so on and so on. Profit, profit, profit! (While also attracting the original fans, of course.) Therefore I have to disagree with your take because it is SUPPOSED to be separate. Charlotte Eggzaklee.
Widowed 11/10/12 after 35 years of marriage
*********************
“In a sense now, I am homeless. For the home, the place of refuge, solitude, love-where my husband lived-no longer exists.” Joyce Carolyn Oates, A Widow's Story
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,423
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,423 |
So we all agree?   Fox
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,970
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,970 |
LMAO, Fox...good one. In fact...eggzacklee! Oh, darn...not in agreement on spelling. Here we go again! LA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,153
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,153 |
I think it's intellectually dishonest to separate the movie from the TV series.
The movie is just another episode in the series, and the series had affairs as part of it's plot When the powers that be decide that there will be a movie made from a TV series, they look at all aspects. On of the requirements is that the movie must be able to STAND ON ITS OWN to entice those who did not watch the TV series so that they can sell more tickets, thus sell more popcorn and soda and so on and so on. Profit, profit, profit! (While also attracting the original fans, of course.) Therefore I have to disagree with your take because it is SUPPOSED to be separate. Charlotte Then why call it by the same name? Your argument is weak. I suppose The Simpsons movie didn't reflect the TV show? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,278
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,278 |
So we all agree? Fox LMAO!! And we only had to break a few eggs to get there!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986 |
Then why call it by the same name?
I suppose The Simpsons movie didn't reflect the TV show? I dunno, I didn't see the Simpson movie. I don't know why this is so important that people have to keep getting their "shots" in. We've heard all the negative ad naseum and get it. I started this thread to express my surprise and TO DISCUSS THE WAY THE ADULTERY WAS HANDLED.If I wanted opinions on whether the movie was righteous, holy or MB-flavored, I would have asked.
Widowed 11/10/12 after 35 years of marriage
*********************
“In a sense now, I am homeless. For the home, the place of refuge, solitude, love-where my husband lived-no longer exists.” Joyce Carolyn Oates, A Widow's Story
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,986 |
So we all agree? Fox LMAO!! And we only had to break a few eggs to get there! What?!?!? I missed it??? There was agreement?? LMAO
Widowed 11/10/12 after 35 years of marriage
*********************
“In a sense now, I am homeless. For the home, the place of refuge, solitude, love-where my husband lived-no longer exists.” Joyce Carolyn Oates, A Widow's Story
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
And we've all heard you defending the indefensible...we get it.
You gave a review of the movie...others chimed in on a review of the theme as well as a "review" on those that find promiscuity, gratuitous sex, foul language, homosexuality (etc, etc) entertaining.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,423
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,423 |
What?!?!? I missed it??? There was agreement?? LMAO It was accidental, I think. And very fleeting....as you can see. I'll try to catch one again...... Fox
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,305
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,305 |
TO DISCUSS THE WAY THE ADULTERY WAS HANDLED.[/b][/size][/color] IMHO I do not believe that adultery could ever be handled well!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,153
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,153 |
Then why call it by the same name?
I suppose The Simpsons movie didn't reflect the TV show? I dunno, I didn't see the Simpson movie. I don't know why this is so important that people have to keep getting their "shots" in. We've heard all the negative ad naseum and get it. I started this thread to express my surprise and TO DISCUSS THE WAY THE ADULTERY WAS HANDLED.If I wanted opinions on whether the movie was righteous, holy or MB-flavored, I would have asked. My question regarding The Simpsons was in reply to Dancing_Machines post. Your reference to "getting in shots" is off base. Why is your statement an opinion and those of us who hold differing opinions are just "getting in shots"? My opinion: That movie SITC, is trash. Right along with the same named TV series. It's filled with numerous incidents of adultery, deceit, gluttony and promiscuity just to name a few horrible real life traits. The women in it are whor*es. It demeans all women. It labels men as 'toys' to be used and tossed away. It demeans all men. Thus it demeans all people. Now I don't limit that to SITC so please don't feel I'm picking on you. I feel that way about at least 50% of what comes out of Hollywood including many of the other films mentioned in this thread. Now that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860 |
From what I read here the movie was a continuation of the series.
From what I read SJPaker had an affair with mr big, his wife almost caught SJP in her own home. mrs big gave chase to find out who the strange woman was, falls knocks out her own teeth, has to be rushed to the hospital.
How can anyone say that this movie handled affairs well when the continuation of the story. How did SJP make amends for what she did to mrs big?
Did mr big or SJP have the karma bus come and run them over? WH and OW married each other without concern for the damage done to mrs big, and are to live happily ever after.
Were there little bigs?
This movie handled affairs well because it was realistic in that most people never find MB. Their WS's get to screw them over. And the karma bus never comes to town.
Last edited by TheRoad; 06/19/08 02:19 PM.
|
|
|
Moderated by Ariel, BerlinMB, Denali, Fordude, IrishGreen, MBeliever, MBSync, McLovin, Mizar, PhoenixMB, Toujours
|
0 members (),
218
guests, and
103
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
