Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Temple of doom. Way too much child slavery.

Doesn’t Jones rescue the children from slavery and return them to their village? It wasn’t an endorsement of child slavery.

Anonymous wrote:Temple of doom. Way too much child slavery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe When Harry Met Sally?

Really, why?

Some of the things Harry says are not very PC/PG. I was rewatching it with a sensitive friend and she had to walk out!

I'm the PP and thought it was interesting that this article on When Harry Met Sally just came out in the Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/07/when-harry-met-sally-and-the-high-maintenance-woman/594382

According to the Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang, it was When Harry Met Sally that popularized the term high-maintenance in American culture. And there it has remained, its use climbing steadily over the past 30 years. An assessment that is also a rebuke, high-maintenance is one of those breezy truisms that is so common, it barely registers as an insult. But the term today does precisely what it did 30 years ago, as backlash brewed against the women’s movement: It serves as an indictment of women who want. It neatly captures the absurdity of a culture that in one breath demands women do everything they can to “maintain” themselves and, in the next, mocks them for making the effort. She wears makeup? High-maintenance. She shops? High-maintenance. She’d prefer the turkey burger? High-maintenance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe When Harry Met Sally?

Really, why?

Some of the things Harry says are not very PC/PG. I was rewatching it with a sensitive friend and she had to walk out!

I'm the PP and thought it was interesting that this article on When Harry Met Sally just came out in the Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/07/when-harry-met-sally-and-the-high-maintenance-woman/594382

According to the Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang, it was When Harry Met Sally that popularized the term high-maintenance in American culture. And there it has remained, its use climbing steadily over the past 30 years. An assessment that is also a rebuke, high-maintenance is one of those breezy truisms that is so common, it barely registers as an insult. But the term today does precisely what it did 30 years ago, as backlash brewed against the women’s movement: It serves as an indictment of women who want. It neatly captures the absurdity of a culture that in one breath demands women do everything they can to “maintain” themselves and, in the next, mocks them for making the effort. She wears makeup? High-maintenance. She shops? High-maintenance. She’d prefer the turkey burger? High-maintenance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe When Harry Met Sally?

Really, why?

Some of the things Harry says are not very PC/PG. I was rewatching it with a sensitive friend and she had to walk out!

Anonymous wrote:Great article about Bull Durham, which probably wouldn’t be made today and barely got made then.

“There’s a temptation when speaking to directors of classic films to ask whether their career-defining movie could get a studio’s green light today. The glossed-over reality, often, is that those pictures barely got made, even at the time.

The script for 1988’s “Bull Durham,” an unconventional comedy set in the world of minor league baseball, was passed on by every studio in Hollywood. Twice. The second time screenwriter Ron Shelton made the rounds, he was joined by Kevin Costner, who would play the aging catcher Crash Davis. Still nothing.”

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2022-07-26/every-hollywood-studio-passed-on-bull-durham-twice-how-it-got-made-anyway

Anonymous wrote:Wild Things with Denise and Neve. No way.

Anonymous wrote:One of the kids in ET calls another kid "Dickbreath". I'm pretty sure they wouldn't put that in a PG movie today! When I watched it with my kids I almost fell over!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soul Man with C. Thomas Howell

Haha. True. As a teen in the 80s, I loved this movie. But, as it turns out - on top of the hugely problematic blackface issue - it's not that great of a movie. But, ultimately its heart was in the right place. He's a privileged white kid who isn't going to get to go to Harvard because his parents are selfish. So he puts on some chemically induced blackface to get free tuition. But that lets him see some of the challenges for black people that were invisible to him. He gets to meet the black woman who would have gotten the scholarship if he hadn't taken it and see the struggles she's facing and why it would be better if she had been the scholarship recipient. And, when James Earl Jones comments on his learning what it means to be black, C. Thomas Howell says, not really - because he could go back to being white any time he wants.

The movie was teaching us about white privilege before that was a phrase that many people used.