Worst. Movie. Ever?

Note from the blogger: This is an old blog post from LJ (back when I used to post on LJ), originally written in July 2006. I'm posting it here because it's not only me at my cleverest, but it also fits in the parameters of the Arts Pirate blog. Enjoy the rant!

This is a rant about a bad film. 


The worst movie ever is (either version of) Disney's The Parent Trap. No, it's not the acting. No, it's not the complete inplausibility that the twins could actually pass for each other and fool their parents. No, it's not even the Linsay Lohan factor. It's the backstory of the movie that disturbs and angers me so.

Ask anyone about The Parent Trap and they'll say one of two things: "Oh, I love that movie! It's so cute!" or "Eww, that movie's too cutesy for me." Notice how the word "cute" will inevitably come up. What no one ever says is "Those parents were horrible! Splitting the twins up like that! That was selfish, irresponsible parenting right there." But think about it, will you? What kind of parent will let their child go eleven years without telling him/her that they have a sibling. And it's not even like an illegitimate sibling, or one from a previous marrige. No, it's a TWIN. 

Now, I know everyone out there does not get along with his or her brothers and sisters. Some of you hate them, but at least you know them. You have a right to be aware of their very existence, even if you'd rather not be. You get a choice as to getting to know your family. But in The Parent Trap both Mitch and Maggie agree to split the girls up like they were property. A book collection. The furniture. And everyone is just okay with this? The grandparents seem just fine about the prospect of never getting to know one of their granddaughters. And why did they get divorced in the first place? I mean, if must have been horrible enough to for each to never contact the other again and hardly mention his/her name in their daughter's presence. Or let their kid go visit mummy/daddy. But they certainly agreed on a lot of things, like idiotic baby-splitting schemes. Yet, when they meet again, there are no fights or slaps or anything. WTF? They seem to have completely forgotten what drove them apart and get all nostalgic because their girls (who, if Mitch and Maggie had their way, would have never, ever met) are singing them songs. Awwwww.

But what about poor Susan and Sharon/Hallie and Annie? Instead of feeling betrayed and comforting each other, their first thought is: "Time to get Mom and Dad back together! Wonder-twin powers, unite! Form of: complete idiots!" Yeah, because all divorced people need to get back together and everything will magically and automatically be okay (I'll be a little lenient on this point, as it was 1961 and divorce was less common). Frankly, I would be threatened more by a lying parent than Dad's girlfriend, who is yet another target of the twins' pranks. (Of course, if she can't stand one little camping trip before running, she should go.) They are turning into little master manipulators just like their parents. Thus, the circle of life continues.

And Disney, you're not completely blameless in this. Yes, the movie was based off of the German kids' book Das doppelte Lottchen ("The Duplicated Lottie") by  Erich Kästner. Yes, back in 1961 there weren't as many high-profile custody battles (custody most often went to the mother; perhaps people watching the movie back then thought "Aww, that's nice. She's being generous and letting him keep one!") and the family courts certainly weren't what they are now. We'll let it slide 'cause that Hayley Mills is so darned cute. But to remake it in the 90s? That kind of thing wouldn't work these days, no matter how young and not-skanky-yet Lindsay is. Was the money just too tempting, that you'd spread the "it's-okay-to-break-up-twins-because-it'll-all-work-out-in-a-hilarious-and-cute-situation" message once again?

In conclusion, The Parent Trap disturbs me. Yes, it's sad and tragic that parents in the real world do far worse to their children every day. But seperating sisters--twin sisters--is still wrong and horrible. And there have been two movies made of this situation, plus some sequels. Until the crazy summer camp mix-up brought them together, those girls were supposed to never meet. It scares me that someone, somewhere would think this is an okay thing to do.

I blame the parents.

Bunnies, Bunnies, It Must Be Bunnies!!

I am reading Watership Down for the second time ever. I'm aware that it's a classic and an easy read, but I've always been wary about it. Maybe because, for about 25 years now, it's been attached to vaguely remembered childhood trauma.

When I was about 4 or 5, I was shown the 1978 movie version (I want to say by my father, but it could have been either parent). What I remember is the scary stuff: rabbits killing rabbits, dogs killing rabbits, and (I think) a cat killing rabbits. Basically, lots of bunny blood-- in a cartoon! I woke up in bed that night crying, bawling something along the lines of "but some of the good bunnies died!" when my parents came to see what was wrong. Nowadays, I don't mind some gore in my movies (Tarantino, anyone?), but back then it was quite the shock indeed!

So I haven't watched Watership Down since. I didn't touch the book until I was 18, even after years of prompting and well-meaning literary suggestions. And you know what? I liked it. It wasn't as scary as I remembered it (recently a friend/coworker said they added bunnies to the movie for extra carnage, so that explains something). Even though I hadn't opened it in over a decade, I like the book even better during my current reading. I hope hope hope that my students like it when I assign it soon.

But then there issue of the movie. Do I show it in class, and revisit that night? Do I confront my childhood fears of lapine slaughter? We shall see. But yes, my longstanding prejudices against the book version of Watership Down have finally been purged.