Also: Being stupid is no obstacle to material success; get God on your side and you’ll get rich, even if it comes at the expense of every other shrimper in the harbor.
I still remember that parody, all these years later. They even said outright that in order to get the popular guy, you’ve got to become a slut.
The Last American Virgin: Nice guys really don’t get the girl.
Bad boy end up with the hot girl? Sounds about right to me.
American Beauty: Avoid mid-life crisis at all costs; it will get you killed by a closet-gay ex-Marine.
Double Jeopardy: If you’ve been convicted of killing your husband, but he isn’t really dead, you may legally kill him again later wherever you may find him.
The Graduate: Love conquers all; the hell with getting jobs and establishing a future together based on mutual respect and sacrifice! (Also, it is OK to drive Eastbound on the upper span of the Bay Bridge)
::raises hand::
Yeah, that was me. Unconditional love. The tree was happy. It got what it wanted, which was helping the one it loved. The boy was unhappy because he sought self-aggrandizement which is a dead end.
Tree wins. Boy loses
On the other hand, maybe I was thinking the boy could have brought a girl to the tree, had a picnic, some sex, then built a house under the tree, then let his kids climb in the tree, maybe hung a tire from it, and when he died he could be buried under it, and then everybody could have been happy.
On the third hand the tree’s happiness was not predicated upon the boys’ choices or bad decisions, only on fulfilling his desires to the best of it’s abilities.
So, I guess the moral for that story is that the trees win… Kind of like the The Happening by M. Knight Shambala.
Here’s the thread in question about The Giving Tree. Unconditional love is certainly one valid reading of it, but I’m convinced that Shel Silverstein wrote the story to be intentionally morally ambiguous. Silverstein has quite a subversive streak in his children’s lit, and rather than hand-hold the child reader down another typical moral play, he gives the reader enough credit to come to their own conclusions by closely analyzing each character’s actions and motivations. I’m not a primary school teacher, but I think this book would be a perfect discussion book for this reason.
I once read some Silverstein poems, including Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout Would Not Take the Garbage Out, to a roomful of second graders. They loved all the poems, but they were spellbound by “Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout.”
Yes—see Uncle Shelby’s ABZ Book. 
Horton Hatches the Egg. The birthmother who gave you up? She’s a lazy, uncaring bitch who tricked someone into taking you.
That’s probably my favorite one of his books.
They’re not ignoring it, they’re correctly observing that Travolta’s “change” is fleeting. It only lasts until he sees the newly sluttified Olivia Newton-John. Here’s the relevant musical number on YouTube. Danny discards his preppy sweater about 20 seconds after noticing Sandy’s new look and attitude, and for the rest of the movie he looks and acts pretty much the same as he did before. Sandy sure doesn’t revert to her old demure self, and it should be pretty clear from the clip that Danny’s not merely pleased that Sandy has decided to show respect for his chosen subculture.
I’ve always hated Grease, and the ending is a big part of the reason why. I don’t think the “moral” could be any more clear – Danny was fine as he was and shouldn’t try to be someone he’s not for Sandy, but Sandy has to completely change her appearance and behavior to make him happy.
It’s not that it’s subject to misinterpretation, it’s just that it’s the other story that I absolutely detest. The only good thing about it is that the idiot dies.
OK, the other good thing about it is that the dog makes it back to camp…
God, I hate that story…
OK, I need to go lie down now…
We’ve done this before, so I’ll repost my contribution from a previous thread:
Escape from New York/ Escape from L.A.:
So the world is a shitty place where ordinary people suffer and perish like roaches, and the people running things only care about their power and privilege. And you’re a violent misfit loner who would be just as happy to live as a predator/scavenger for the rest of your life. The answer is to DESTROY CIVILIZATION.
Cocoon: Your only chance at a healthy, happy, rewarding old age is if the aliens come and take you away.
'Twas the Night Before Christmas television special: Intellectual curiosity sucks all the fun out of life and people who want to investigate the world rather than just go with the flow are troublemakers deserving of contempt. Then there is the bonus in the that show with the song “Let up a little on the wonder why and give your heart a try” which says if you don’t believe holiday myths are the objective truth then you can’t really enjoy the holiday and are incapable of love or real human emotion.
You are all missing the point of Shrek: It’s wrong to judge and make fun of someone due to their appearance. Unless they are short – then it’s OK!
I just wanted to say that I share your feelings. Ever since I read that story in English class in 8th or 9th grade, it has stood out in my mind and not in a good way. (I would also like to note that that story was part of an anthology that seemed to be obsessively focused on morbidity. I don’t mind the occasional downbeat story, but it seemed very odd to me at the time that they wouldn’t try to present something a bit more balanced to 14-year-olds… you know, maybe give us a little uplift amidst the gloom and doom. This was back in the early 70s, and judging by my daughter’s reading list in her 9th grade English class this year, things haven’t changed much.)
Finding Nemo: Your pet goldfish wants to escape to the ocean. Help him get there by flushing him down the toilet.
All they had to do was to have him wear his letter sweater while they drive off into the sunset. *Then *it would have been a message about each changing for the other. As it was… the ending sucked ass.