She. And thanks, but I actually felt like quite the dumbass when I first starting noticing it, which was after a number of viewings. It’s just so obvious. In my defense, I went to see it for the first time as a “let’s watch scary man kill and/or talking about killing/eating people,” and wasn’t in the space to notice the gender interactions.
I’ve only seen the first two, and those only once, and a while ago. You paying? 
Actually, The Little Mermaid is a pretty good example of bizarrely acceptable teenage rebellion. (I realized this after seeing the Under the Sea show at Tokyo Disney Sea, where story is SIGNIFICANTLY different and the moral boils down to, “the outside world is scary and weird and you should just stay at home,” which made me think a little more deeply about TLM.)
Ariel has a crush on a guy, of a different race/species than her. She runs away from home and shacks up with him, having to deal with some cultural differences in the process. She literally transforms herself to be with this guy, giving up everything about her past. After her father finds her again, he accepts his daughter’s relationship and gives his blessing. They get married and probably start popping out interracial kids right away.
The sub-plot where Ariel is fighting another woman for his affections is a minuscule piece of story compared to the main father-daughter conflict.
Frame this as hispanic and <insert race here> instead of mermaid and human—keeping in mind that Ariel just had her [del]quinceañera[/del] 16th birthday celebration—and it would be considered a pretty edgy story. The message is that it’s okay for an underage girl to run away from home, abandon her culture, basically change everything about herself as long as she really loves the guy. Oh, and her dad will probably be okay with it. :rolleyes:
For some reason, I don’t think that’s a movie you’d be all that comfortable showing your pre-teen daughters. It’s like a prettied-up version of Mi Vida Loca or Mi Familia.
Not for anyone to see the third movie. Shudder.
Can’t you imagine a catsuit with long black gloves? And a hood & mask, maybe with little cat ears?
As for ‘follow-up’, well I can’t get into detail on a family message board, but there are plenty of activities, including the obvious, that don’t have to involve skin to skin contact.
Now, if Rogue had given up her powers to have a child, I would have found that heart-wrenching, not annoying.
Yeah, but then someone would have complained about how anti-feminist it was that Rouge abandoned her career and her responsibilities because she wants to make babies.
I’m not saying I’d turn down a handjob from Anna Paquin wearing a latex glove, but I would be rather upset if I had a condition that never let me touch anyone without putting them in a coma, and that I’d make the exact same decision Rouge made in the movie.
Speaking of Disney cartoons, how about the message from Beauty and the Beast? Chicks really dig it when you kidnap them. Belle clearly had Stockholm Syndrome.
The Catcher in the Rye: I don’t care about the plot. I don’t care about the characters. I care about the setting, about getting to spend some time wandering around the New York City of that specific era and seeing the various sights, even if it does mean tagging along with someone I don’t care about doing things I don’t care about.
I made my husband read Pride and Prejudice, and he loved the dashing hero! He told me that he wanted to be just like the hero, who was awesome!
…The hero he had in mind was Mr. Bennett.
Also, what great benefit is Rogue getting from her powers? It’s not like she’s giving up superintelligence or supersenses or immortality or flight. She’s giving up a power that screws up her life while most of the time not benefiting her at all. I don’t foresee her moping about thinking longingly about how much better off she would be if she could still suck the life out of her friends.
That’s why I used the term “gimp suit” earlier.
Indeed, and especially true for movie-Rogue, who basically had to grab onto someone for some seconds to absorb their abilities, usually knocking them out in the process, and doesn’t seem to retain the powers very long. Add on to that that she’s a normal teenage girl—actually she seems to be a shellshocked teenage girl when we meet up with her—who doesn’t seem to want to be a superhero, and isn’t particularly skilled at it, from all I remember seeing.
Compare that to, say, the Rogue from the X-Men: Evolution cartoon, who just has her baseline powers (i.e. no added flight or invulnerability), but her powers seem faster and more adaptable, and she’s a tougher and more standoffish character to begin with.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the movie-Rogue was an entirely valid and interesting interpretation of the character; but it’s also one where it would make much more sense if she wanted to give up her powers, and much less to base an action franchise around.
Sinclair was much more concerned about working conditions than food safety issues and was dismayed that people mostly were upset about the fact that their sausage contained ground up workers, than that workers were being ground up. Teddy Roosevelt told Sinclair that, “you aimed for America’s hearts, but hit it in its stomach.”
**Blow ** - Being a drug dealer is AWESOME!
An Education - If you’re intelligent, you’re not entitled to have any fun. Any attempt to have fun will end in catastrophe and will set you back from your true purpose in life, studying and settling into a boring job.
Father of the Bride - The father of the bride has absolutely no say in the wedding, even if he is paying for it. He’ll be stepped on, kicked around, marginalized and laughed at as too cheap for wanting to put a legitimate cap on the price of the wedding.
And of course, the ultimate in taking away the wrong message from a movie, How I Met Your Mother’s Barney on The Karate Kid.
THANK YOU!!!
I’ve mentioned my longstanding hatred of this movie at least once on the boards many years ago, and occasionally in real life, but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone else express the same opinion.
The worst part is that it’s played as a happy ending for everyone, as if that’s all the nerd could possibly want or hope for. I can’t watch this movie without becoming angry and depressed for the rest of the day!
The other worst part is that the rest of the movie is so classic, I want to keep watching it whenever I come across it on TV, and then I end up unhappy. I’ve always said that if I ever see John Hughs I’m going to punch him in the mouth for this. Don’t think being dead gets him off the hook! He’s buried somewhere, and jawbones take a long time to decompose!
I’ve mentioned this in a few threads before, but as long as we’re including books: 1984 is only tangentially about a disutopian future world and is primarily about a narcissist’s midlife crisis and disillusionment.
Catcher in the Rye - rich kids have boring problems.
But New York City is an interesting place.
(Haven’t we done this before? ;))
I got these messages from these movies too.
Though somewhat empathetic to the verbal and physical abuse aggregated by the diabolical Moe upon Larry, Shemp and the Curlies, unmitigated anguish was always reserved for Symona Boniface–often driving me to the brink of tears (…alright, I admit…sometimes well past the brink). And the torment those hellion brothers Marks heaped on poor Margaret Dumont—appalling!
UMM.. these things are TRUE! 
1.Going to school is training for the WORK world!
2.It’s not about him! (or the groom for that matter)
It is about the groom, yes, to the same extent it is about the bride, and the father of the bride, who is financing it, has every right to limit his cash outlay. We must, after all, live in the real world.
That isn’t all it’s about, and never has been. Thinking it is leads to a very warped, stunted, and nearly useless personality.
Derleth-My point about the wedding being all about the bride was somewhat tongue-n-cheek. Sorry, my bad for leaving it vague.
But I stand by my firm believe that school is training for the “real” world, i.e. work.