Recall the exchange between Mauricio and Tony Robbins:
Mauricio: “But how can he not feel them when they’re …” [makes suggestive getures] “… eeeugh!”
Tony Robbins: “The brain sees what the heart wants it to feel.”
Therefore, if a 300-pound Rosemary did jump on him hard enough to fracture his spine, his spine wouldn’t actually fracture, because, darn it, his vision of her Inner Beauty would be strong enough to support her weight. Or some such saccharine-sweet nonsense. 
Since tracer brought this movie up, I have one question. The guy with Spina bifida seems like a very cool person, and yet, Hal’s perception of him doesn’t change when put into the trance. I know it would ruin the whole plot since he knew him from before and he would realise something was up if suddenly changed completely, but it seemed odd. I don’t think he is unnatractive, but all thre rest of the people’s appereance changed radically under the spell to reflect inner beauty, and yet spina-bifida man remained exactly the same.
With the friend I understand that he remained the same since his character was not necessarily overly nasty nor wonderful on the inside, but spina-bifida man (sorry, but I don’t remember the character’s name) was a wonderful person overall.
Was there some sort of justification in the commentary track?
That – along with the fact that every other person Hal already knew didn’t change in appearance – was actually explained in the movie, only the movie didn’t do a very good job of explaining it. They were more explicit about it in the following deleted scene, which takes place after Hal thinks Rosemary had gotten back together with Ralph:
MAURICIO: “I found him.”
HAL: “Found who?”
MAURICIO: “Tony Robbins! He agreed to re-hypnotize you. He says he can do it over the phone. He can even make it retroactive this time.”
HAL: “What’s that mean?”
MAURICIO: “That means that it not only works on women you meet from now on, even women you already know can be good looking! Uh, if they’ve got Inner Beauty.”
The Farrelly Brothers took enough flak for this alleged “mistake” in their movie (where people Hal already knows don’t look any different) that they jumped up-and-down on the DVD’s audio commentary pointing out the two places in the movie where this exception is mentioned:
When Hal’s in the elevator with Tony Robbins, Robbins says, “From this moment on, whenever you meet somebody in the future, you’re only going to see what’s inside them”; and
When Mauricio first explains to Hal the nature of the trance Hal had just been snapped out of, Mauricio says, “He hypnotized you so that ugly girls you met from then on would to you look like supermodels!”
Maurico, Walt (the Spina Bifida guy), Mr. Shanahan, and even his co-workers Jan and Artie, continued to look the same to Hal even while he was under the spell, because he’d already met them before Tony Robbins put the spell on him.
I think they should have been clearer about it. I know I should have payed more attention, but both instances were lost on me and then I just kept thinking about it. I really did like the movie though. Thanks for the clarification tracer.
I’m still hoping they decide to go on and do Shallow Hal 2: Saving the World in Kirabas.
Saw this on HBO last night with my wife. Going in, we were both really concerned because of the bad press it had gotten when it was released. It was condemned by people who had never seen it, which is never a good idea. So we were a little leery going in.
We both really liked the movie. It was nothing like many of the people had said it was, the true message was that inner beauty is so much more important than outer beauty. And seeing Jack Black slowly, but surely, learn that lesson, was a good experience. I, too, got a little bit of dust in my eye during Cadence’s second scene.
It is a shame that the trailers made the movie appear to be Kingpin, but about fat people, rather than the endearing romantic comedy it was. And it is a shame that so many people judged it without seeing it. I recommend everybody who stayed away from this movie give it a chance.
I stayed away from this movie when it first came out because I didn’t want to watch wall-to-wall fat jokes.
Now I’ve seen it and I was surprised to see that it’s not wall-to-wall fat jokes. It’s more like throw rug fat jokes. Most of the gags in the movie are fat related, there just aren’t a whole lot of gags.
I realize a lot of folks liked this movie (particularly tracer) and I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind, but I found it to be really smarmy (which I was not expecting) and pretty lifeless.
I also imagined what it would be like to be an overweight girl going to see this movie with her friends. Would she force herself to laugh at all the broken furniture scenes?
The whole concept of saying fat is beautiful by showing it as being thin smacks of insincerity.
My $0.02
I had the same problem when I first saw this film. The creators are saying that fat people can be beautiful, but beauty is then defined as being perceived as thin. It later occured to me, though, that we are seeing everyone through Hal’s eyes, and at the time Robbins puts the whammy on him, Hal’s definition of beauty is all based on physical appearance. If Robbins were to put the same spell on Hal at the end of the film, maybe everyone with inner beauty would then look like heavyset. Hal’s new ideal of beauty is Rosie as she really looks, so maybe everyone with a good heart would look similar to her.
That could be a stretch, but it made me feel better about liking the movie.
I just saw the movie and was surprised how much I liked it. I agrred with you that it was based on Hal’s idea of beauty.
My S.O. thinks this is a great film, whereas I saw it as one of the most criminal misuses of celluloid ever perpetrated. As others have pointed out, the entire premise is based on an intellectual deceit when it’s revealed that Hal’s escape from “shallowness” rests not on his character having changed but instead on an artificial distortion of reality - does anyone REALLY think that the Hal character, with his normal perception restored, would get anywhere near the heavy Rosemary?
And, in another note, Jack Black pretty much ruins any movie he’s in IMHO. For the life of me, I can’t discern the slightest trace of talent, charisma or acting ability in him - though he is fairly adept at recycling the same smarmy, annoying characters again, again and again. Will someone please tell me when his fifteen minutes are over?
GASP
You didn’t like him in “High Fidelity”!?
Jack Black kicks ass.