Printable View
*echoes SFs post*
gawd...
i don't think i need to say this...
but have ya SEEN THOSE FILMS OF RECENT??
GAWD!
everytime i see one, i think of the great
80s teen flicks and just wanna curl up
and ball my eyes out because i think the
world is in a funk and playing a cruel
joke on those that managed to be kicked
out of the 80s prematurely...
the BREAKFAST CLUB is, by far, my favorite...
with PRETTY IN PINK at a close second.
here's what i despise about both PRETTY IN PINK
and 16 CANDLES (esp the latter)...
the image of the IDEAL male.
to me, jake (16C), was a complete dick.
i realize he had some sort of an epiphany
somewhere in that movie, which made him
go for ringwald...
what bothers me, is that the reasons jake
dumped his (then) girlfriend are the same
reasons ringwald was so ga-ga over him.
granted, it was the 80s. and nothing smells
like money better that the 80s. (not that i
was rambling on about jake's money)
this is prolly what puts PIP over 16C.
i liked how ringwald didn't really change
who she was in order to bag ol' mccarthy.
and i really dig annie potts character.
(even though she was awfully fickle)
i also liked james spader's character...
another dick. but i couldn't see anyone
play a better snob. (i like the way he says
SHE'S TRASH... or something like that)
the tie that binds both movies is the virgin
nerds that love ringwald... (obsessed???).
both anthony michael hall and john cryer
were avoided. it's always been interesting
to me WHY this was so.
maybe someone can help me figure it out.
perhaps because they weren't (then)
considered MEN.... because of their sappy
'loves'.
i'm not sure.
<font color="#6699FF" size="1">[ July 17, 2002 07:41 AM: Message edited by: shatzy ]</font>
i don't think you can talk about economics until you've seen fast times at ridgemont high. i can't believe their mentality, it was all based on who had the better jobs and everything was a little microscopic study of the world at large. and i can't believe how much sex was tied to money.
about 16c's. jake is NOT a dick. anyone who goes for daggy molly over beautiful, perfect blonde girlfriend is elevated from dick status in my books. he goes for molly not because she's poor but because he thinks she has substance. the reason why she likes him is because he's hot, rich and unattainable. so who is the superficial one now?
that is what i was trying to say.
jake made an epiphany, ringwald didn't.
something subliminal...
if jake had the epiphany, did that mean that
as long as the male of the relationship
treated the female ok... everything would
be accpetable (as far as the female looking
for a male to take care of her emotionally
and economically?)?
yes, because in their relationship, molly feels inferior to him because he's got all these attributes and she's only got her personality. so i guess he is the dominating person in their relationship and once he's tired of her, she'd get the boot and there'd be no arguing because molly thinks herself subservient to him so she just thinks that she's lucky he 'chose' her to begin with. by that stage, molly would then go out with the nerdy virgin types and realise what a dick the rich one was.
http://media.rivals.net/media/jpg/2002021002941301.jpg
Best 80's movie!
never seen it [img]confused.gif[/img]
Not surprised.
[img]frown.gif[/img]
Never knew this (might be a lie) but Rob Lowe was first offered the part of Edward Scissorhands, but turned it down. Said the character was too effeminate.