Spur of the moment Twilight Zone Episode Spoiler

Just a thought about this episode. Spoiler.

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

The girl in the episode marries her true love instead of a nice boring ? guy.
The true love turns out to be a drunk and abusive who loses all her money.
When I first saw it I thought that it would have been better if she had married the nice guy. I think that would have made a better episode.
Not that is was that great to begin with.

Actually, I’ve always kind of liked this one. But the moral that she should have “done the sensible thing” instead of “going with her heart” does kind of ring wrong. Are you saying that the “good guy” from the “right side of the tracks” should have been an asshole, too? Still, great cast. Diana Hyland, Roger Davis, Robert Hogan as the corners of the triangle.

Is there any particular episode you’re referring to here? Because that also sounds like the plot to Show Boat.

Of course, if we’re just spoiling random episodes

It’s a cookbook! :eek:

I wish it had beena tennis manual! :eek:

I was thinking it was

A training manual for waitstaff! :eek:

WHICH episode?:confused::mad:

“Spur of the Moment” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spur_of_the_Moment_(The_Twilight_Zone) is the title of the episode - it’s not a description of the OP’s decision to provide spoilers…

I think the point of the story is the twist that she should have married the “safer” guy because marrying the “dangerous” romantic guy was a bad decision. Even in the 50s turning your back on the safe bet and following your heart to live happily ever after was a romantic cliche and this episode’s point was to subvert it.

I like to think the ideal choice for Anne would have been taking a third option–after all, if someone isn’t doing it for you he isn’t doing it for you, and just because David was the wrong choice didn’t mean Robert would have been the right one. She was only eighteen, after all, and her older self had a point when she blamed her father for keeping her sheltered and making all her choices for her, so she didn’t have very good judgment when push came to shove. Perhaps the best outcome for her would have been to insist on education (women did have college educations in 1939, when the story began) and travel and such, to broaden her horizons and develop herself in her own right, and eventually to choose someone who had his feet firmly on the ground AND rang her chimes.

But I have come to appreciate the outcome of this. I’ve never seen the appeal of “bad boys”, and although I can appreciate the “bad-boy-redeemed-by-love-of-good-woman” story as fiction, I am glad Richard Matheson used this story to put forth the message “Listen, women, sometimes the ‘bad boy’ isn’t a misunderstood hero or diamond in the rough. More often than not, the bad boy is a weakling and loser that will never be anything but a bad MAN.”

(I also like to imagine that for all his faults, Anne’s father objected to David because he saw David’s character (or lack thereof) more clearly than Anne did–and that there was a “missing scene” right before her elopement where he said to her, “Look, sweetheart, it isn’t the fact that he’s not rich. He’s been known for losing his temper easily, drink seems to run in his family, and he’s never held a job for more than three months”–only for Anne to scoff at him.)