MovieChat Forums > Mystic Pizza (1988) Discussion > And more Mystic Pizza questions ...

And more Mystic Pizza questions ...



1) It's clearly fall when Charlie takes Daisy to his house -- presumably the summer home where he's been crashing -- and he clearly states the utilities are all turned off. Are we supposed to believe that wealthy Charlie has been living for months in a place without electricity, and without heat in the cold Connecticut autumn? And wouldn't Charlie's father's bedroom be freezing cold, fire or no fire? Yet you don't see Daisy shivering despite wearing only a t-shirt.

2) Kat and Tim are supposed to be all devoted to Phoebe. Yet at the beginning of the movie, they leave her alone on a porch in a house under construction, where if she wanders off she could get really hurt, to go upstairs and start their flirtation?

3) Daisy and Kat are supposed to be poor (Daisy's "I'm poor and I hate it!"). But only in Hollywood could "poor" mean a two-story house on a tree-lined street, where each girl has her own bedroom, the mom has a car, and Daisy has all those nice clothes.

I like this movie, but after 20 or so watchings, the sillinesses keep jumping out.

reply

... well, not a question, just something neat to notice. When Daisy has dinner at Charlie's, she's dressed up to the nines -- fancy cocktail dress with rhinestones, big shiny earrings, heels, the works. Yet everyone else is just wearing normal slightly dressed-up clothes - a nice blouse or shirt or two, but nothing like what Daisy has. Another reason for her to feel all out of place and trying too hard.

reply


You need to remember that this was the '80's - it was 'de rigor' to go buy stuff, wear it once and then return it. Everything about the '80's was over the top, hence the rhinestones, heels, etc. What Charlie's family was wearing at dinner was and is considered to be tasteful. This movie should be taken in context to the times.

FYI, I have lived in CT for most of my life.



It's never too late to make a difference. .........

reply

"de rigueur" mon ami (amie)

"I love those redheads!" (Wooderson, Dazed and Confused, 1993)

reply

Are we supposed to believe that wealthy Charlie has been living for months in a place without electricity, and without heat in the cold Connecticut autumn?


That's the funny thing about Connecticut...the autumns aren't all cold. It can be in the 50s and 60s right into the New Year. Some of the weather is completely crazy.

(BTW...I'm a Nutmegger myself).

-----------
Feed your mind (and the world):http://www.freerice.com

reply

That's the funny thing about Connecticut...the autumns aren't all cold. It can be in the 50s and 60s right into the New Year. Some of the weather is completely crazy.


I'm gonna have to disagree with you there. Connecticut, and New England on a whole, is pretty freezing from Autumn-Winter. You definitely need heating.

reply

Especially near/on the water! Imagine how damp and windy it would be there. I'm from central NJ, and our autumn weather varies, but it does get cold.

reply

Just a response to #3....that IS poor in the town this movie was filmed in. Daisy and Kat's home in the movie is the house I grew up in. We watched them film and it was, by far, the most exciting thing ever to happen in that town. However, since MOST of coastal Connecticut homes are 2 story, that's not really indicative of any kind of money status.

We were poor. We weren't destitute, but we WERE poor. That is not at all out of context or out of proportion.

reply

Yes the house and living conditions were by no means indicative of a wealthy situation...

Also coming from a Connecticut resident - I know many people who are very poor who live in the same type of houses/neighborhoods....

reply

Charlie didn’t say he was staying in that house he just said that his father turns off the electricity. Charlie just thinks he does it because he is home and he doesn’t trust Charlie. Charlie most likely is staying in his home with his parents. The thing about ultra rich people is this. They don’t want their kids to ever appear like losers because it reflects the way they are looked at. It would be embarrassing for them if Charlie was homeless or living without electricity. He would never do without no matter how he screws up. Daddy won’t let him; because if it got out his son was a loser he would be embarrassed at the country club.

reply


I grew up with a family that owned a summer home on Cape Cod. We always shut off power & water in the winter. Its very common in summer homes. For Charlie to turn on power it would have already been in his father's name and if he had it turned on his father would know he had quit school and was slacking off, so it made sense for Charlie to fly under the radar concerning his father.

BTW a fireplace can make a room so hot you are sweating.


... End of line.

reply

In regards to Daisy's comment about being poor....

This is New England, in the 1980's. There was a definite "class distinction" between Daisy's family and Charlie's. While the Arujo family was not "poor", they were definitely blue collar working class and that doesn't get you in good with "old money". Daisy's family was Catholic and most likely 2nd or 3rd generation Americans, while Charlie's family could probably trace ancestors back to the Colonial period and they were certainly "blue-blooded WASPs". I believe she was lamenting over being "blue collar", and to her and her friends that lived in a town frequented by wealthy tourists, "working class" equated "poor". That's my take on it...

reply

Other comments about (3):

Daisy's house isn't new--Charlie even comments "I love these old houses". You don't know how long the house has been in the family. Maybe it was even Daisy's great grandparent's house, say, and has been long since paid off. The family would only have to pay whatever the taxes are per year. The film certainly didn't give an impression that the family had just moved in.

In most of the US, you can't do much, including work, buying groceries, etc. if you do not have some kind of car--there just isn't public transportation for you to get around. In the 80s, you could easily buy a decent used car for, say, $1000 or under. Also, one of the vehicles the family has is a ratty-looking former mail delivery truck, which they probably got very cheaply used.

Even if one's parents make enough money that it's a stretch to call them "poor", that doesn't mean that their kids are not poor--parents do not have to give anything to kids, and often enough they do not (some rich folks even do this). Kat and Daisy worked in a pizza place. They're not going to be making much money--probably minimum wage (or close to it) plus tips, and tips in a place like that aren't likely to be a lot.

Of course, people say they're poor when they're above the poverty line, but you're "officially poor" if you're below the poverty line. Being below the poverty line doesn't necessarily mean that you're living in a cardboard box under a highway. The family likely was below the poverty line in terms of income, at least at that point.


http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies

reply

The first one I hadn't noticed but now that you mention it....2 and 3 were exactly what I was thinking when I watched it. I was wondering about that poor mess. How are you poor in a house like that and every one has a job?

Where have all the good writers gone?

reply

I think they felt they were poor because their resources to do anything else were so limited. Kat had four jobs, Daisy said she was going to sling pizza all her life, she couldn't afford to keep a $160.00 dress, their mother worked in what looked like a fish cannery. They can't afford to go to higher education or grad schools, they are essentially stuck. That is poor. You can be poor without being hungry and homeless.

reply

The question is obviously asked by someone who isn't poor. They were poor. Daisy can't keep the dress, Kat was working four jobs just to help pay college tuition, their mother worked at a fish cannery.

The house-I grew up in a three story house on Section 8-housing assistance. The size of the house has NOTHING to do with a person's economic class.

"Give a hand to my band, Sexual Chocolate!" Coming to America

reply

It kinda cracks me up that statement... What - trees don't go into the poor areas or the hood? Every poor person does not have a car?? All two story houses are so glamorous and spendy that working class people can't afford them??

Nobody notices the sober Indians. On tv the drunk Indians emote In books drunk Indians philosophize

reply

I was under the impression the mother did not have a car. There is one in the driveway that looks like it is being repaired and Daisy tells her that she won't be able to take her to the potluck, and the mother said she could get a ride with Louisa. Then they get in the Mystic Pizza truck that Daisy must be borrowing. Kat and JoJo drive that truck at other times in the movie. This indicated to me that none of them owned cars, but Kat did have that cool scooter.

reply

She didn't mean poor as in living in squalor and poverty, she meant poor IN COMPARISON to Charlie's family. Daisy had a tendency to be dramatic and she was probably using "poor" more for its connotations rather than as a general reflection of how her family really were financially. They were certainly not wealthy, they weren't poor either, but definitely middle class. Probably lower middle class. For a Connecticut house, Daisy's home was pretty average, most of them are massive sprawling mansions. Yes, it was two storey, but that hardly indicates incredible wealth. From what I remember, it wasn't in the best condition either. Can anyone back this up with pictures? I'm sure it's been renovated by now though.

reply