MovieChat Forums > Tinkse7en > Replies
Tinkse7en's Replies
Yes, it's not completely unrealistic to think they could have led a fun, adventurous, charmed life together. Jack was obviously talented & resourceful: suppose they'd headed off to Hollywood, then in its infancy? Rose would have made an iconic silent screen queen, & Jack a famous producer & director...
...after all, look who was the actual artist who drew the pictures the movie showcased! ;-)
It's pure eye-candy. The huge, opulent ship, the beautiful clothes & jewels, the pretty pretty protagonists, the overwhelming sfx as the ship made its final descent: all combine to make it very watchable.
I think it's more than likely that Ruth became an unpaid companion to some wealthy elderly lady, living the ignominious life of a poor relation. These genteelly impoverished ladies were held in general contempt by Society, so this punishment is very much karma for her!
Manners & etiquette are on the decline indeed, but this is less a concern about which fork to use than a lack of delicate consideration for other people's feelings, which seems to have risen in the last generation or two. The social contract that traditionally deemed rudeness unacceptable seems to not be worth the fine vellum it was engraved upon.
One point that I think is getting somewhat lost here is that it doesn't matter what we, the viewers, perceive as relative poverty: the fact is that Andie & her friends were actively & viciously bullied, mocked, & put down by the "richies" because of being from the wrong side of the tracks. We are shown several instances of this, Steff even going so far as calling her a "piece of low-grade ass." This type of classist tyranny, which seems to have been condoned by school authorities, goes very far in affecting any self-esteem that the poorer kids would have.
We should rather be celebrating Andie's valiantly brave efforts to rise above her environment.
Btw, lol
Considering that OG Glinda, Billie Burke, was a Ziegfeld Girl, who were the Victoria's Secret supermodels of their day, it's not all that unlikely.
Oh, this is a great thread. Thank you very much to everyone who posted.
But especially, thank you for that lovely bit about Margaret Hamilton. I think that Judy Garland was a young girl who needed kindness in her life, & isn't it ironic that the woman who portrayed the most Evil Villainess of Cinema Ever, provided her that?
I am watching it now. It is a truly bad movie, on so very many levels (bad almost everything, from the acting, the script, the horrendous CGI that was bad even for its time) ... but I still love it, very much.
It's still Oz!
Can you imagine what Peter Jackson could have made of the Oz books, had he the same time, energy, & resources that he put into LOTR?
I dunno. I am watching it, with a critical eye, as I type this.
I find that ALL of these talented actors (Franco, Williams, Weisz, Kunis) put in a terribly forced performance: a bit like watching a high school play. Usually, I find that when this happens, it comes down to the script &/or the director. In this case, I'm blaming the director: he had the talent right there in front of him but let them all phone it in. But the script comes in for its own share of blame: unnatural ways of speaking (no contractions, for instance) make actors sound forced & fake, especially to American sensibilities.
Franco did the best: he did give his character the sleazy feel of a Bad Man With A Heart Of Gold. But then, he was the only actor allowed lines that were contemporary. The others had to make do with a script that was nearly Victorian/Regency in their speech patterns, without the virtue of this being an Austen-esque period drama!
Honestly, I really don't see any other actors doing any better, with what they were given to work with. Visually, the ladies were stunningly beautiful, although really, a bad fake wig on Michelle Williams' natural beauty was very, very uncalled-for, haha!
Replying again: In my happy perfect world, Amanda moves to England. Remember, her job was so high-pressure that it drove her boyfriend to cheat because she never had time for him. Given that job, she would never have time for Graham or the littles. She used her work as a way to stay distanced.
No. Amanda sells her boutique trailer-making company for a huge profit (something has to pay for all those Dior coats!), moves to Surrey, and after some time adjusting & hilariously milking the cow, finds a calling that l leave to your imagination... and however wild that might be, it is still within the bounds of reality, rom-com as it may be.
A bit late to this party, but I'd read this thread when the film was running before the holiday (bad pun completely intended).
It aired again last night, & I picked up on several things that definitely foreshadowed Iris' eventual shift to LA.
One is that she became fascinated with films, thru Arthur. Her skill set is journalism & editing (remember, hot-shot Jasper was using her for that). A job in Hollywood film industry would not be unrealistic at all, given that. I also believe, without proof, that Iris went on to write her own screenplays. It is partly why she is so fascinated by Arthur, and look how hooked she becomes upon the old movies he recommends.
JMHO, but it makes sense in any happily-ever-after world of The Holiday, she also becomes an Oscar-winning screenwriter, & movingly dedicates her win to "my mentor, Arthur".
Another thing: she would never leave Arthur. One thing easily missed, is that she told her brother that she'd met the most amazing man. The love between the two of them may perhaps be the truest love story of the entire movie.
OH, and yes: another tiny bit of future-telling: Jasper says, when he visits her in LA: "This suits you."
Re: Cameron's Magic Suitcase: being from California, she wouldn't have cold-weather gear.
So either she spent an evening in cathartic online retail therapy & had everything shipped to the UK, or had a personal shopper/stylist put together & ship a vacation wardrobe .
(The very rich ARE different)
I agree that it glamourizes prostitution, and I loathe that. That slice of life is anything but glamorous. It's sordid & hateful & no one should have to live like thst.
But, it's a Cinderella story, yet still would have been better served if the ending had been bittersweet.
Americans, so Hollywood's focus groups have led us, want happy endings.
We want the fairytale!
Besides being a funny moment, I think it was a device to show how much of a connection they'd developed: ie, he completely was confident, knowing her, that that she'd answer. And yes! gave him an opportunity to connect & tease- we all look for that in the beginning of any relationship.
It was an extremely human moment.
Watching it on cable now, and I'm stunned at the subtle nuances in Julia's performance that I'd missed before, in many viewings over the years. Pitch-perfect, she is.