[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference quark::mennotes-v1

Title:Topics Pertaining to Men
Notice:Archived V1 - Current file is QUARK::MENNOTES
Moderator:QUARK::LIONEL
Created:Fri Nov 07 1986
Last Modified:Tue Jan 26 1993
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:867
Total number of notes:32923

710.0. "Father of the Bride" by SOLVIT::SOULE (Pursuing Synergy...) Thu Jan 02 1992 11:04

My wife and I took in "Father of the Bride" (starring Steve Martin, Diane 
Keaton, and Martin Short) yesterday and, overall, the movie was excellent...
Of course, this is my opinion and it may not be shared with other members of
this file which makes it good fodder for discussion especially concerning
Father/Daughter issues (in my case, I'm kinda glad I have sons...).  

Anyway, I am interested as to what effect this movie had on you.  What parts
were not so funny, what parts were touching, etc.  Obviously, you have to go
see this movie...
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
710.1it was nothing special, IMODELNI::STHILAIRErings, cats & menThu Jan 02 1992 11:1319
    I saw this movie a couple of weeks ago and I was repulsed to see a
    family spend $125K just on one *day* (approx. cost of the wedding in
    the movie), at a time when the country is in the midst of a recession,
    people are losing their jobs, can't sell their homes for the amount
    they originally paid, and homelessness is increasing in alarming
    proportions, esp. mothers and children.  (I saw a baglady, mid-40's, in
    Shrewsbury yesterday! Used to have to go to Boston or Cambridge to see
    them.)
    
    I think Steve Martin is appealing and that Diane Keaton is a good
    actress, but I found the movie superficial and only moderately funny
    and not touching at all really.
    
    I never could understand the allure of spending a fortune on one day,
    just for a wedding.  It seems such a waste and they're usually as
    boring as hell anyway - weddings and receptions.  
    
    Lorna
    
710.2QUARK::LIONELFree advice is worth every centThu Jan 02 1992 12:045
    You should see the original Vincente Minelli version starring
    Cary Grant and Elizabeth Taylor.  (As well as the sequel, "Father's
    Little Dividend."  Probably much better than the remake.
    
    				STeve
710.3Yeah, and you Probably won't need to moderate this file during 1992...SOLVIT::SOULEPursuing Synergy...Thu Jan 02 1992 13:066
.2>  Probably much better than the remake.
    
Hope you can go see this remake with an open mind.  Spencer Tracy is one
of my favorites but Steve Martin seems to have found a vehicle ("Parenthood"
and "Father of the Bride") for his type of talent.  At any rate I will be
looking forward to your comments after you have seen the film.
710.4MOVIES CONFERENCE RECOMMENDATIONHSOMAI::BUSTAMANTEThu Jan 02 1992 14:352
    There's a Notes conference called "Movies" where this subject would be
    welcome.
710.5STARCH::WHALENVague clouds of electrons tunneling through computer circuits and bouncing off of satelites.Thu Jan 02 1992 15:0111
re .1

>    I saw this movie a couple of weeks ago and I was repulsed to see a
>    family spend $125K just on one *day* (approx. cost of the wedding in
>    the movie), at a time when the country is in the midst of a recession,

I haven't seen the movie, but some people wpuld consider spending that kind
of money (if you have it) to be pumping up the economy.  Though I do agree that
it is excessive.

Rich
710.6SOLVIT::SOULEPursuing Synergy...Thu Jan 02 1992 15:5014
.4>    There's a Notes conference called "Movies" where this subject would be
.4>    welcome.

I don't really want a "Movies" type of discussion as much as I want a "Mennotes"
type, hence, I posted and tried to word the note as so...  As Lorna stated in
her reply, she was not impressed with the decadence of values (pardon my 
interpretation) that was portrayed and didn't see this comedy as being very
funny except for (perhaps) certain parts.  In my case, I could see myself
identifying with some of the things the Steve Martin character was going
through and would bet other men would as well (especially those men with
daughters on the verge of being married).  So BUSTAMANTE, are you gonna take
a chance and see the movie so that you may discuss this in Mennotes?  You only
risk being entertained or offended which is what you get from Mennotes, anyway!
Hey, if you do see the movie you may even learn something about yourself...
710.7R2ME2::BENNISONVictor L. Bennison DTN 381-2156 ZK2-3/R56Thu Jan 02 1992 16:105
    I haven't seen it, but my daughter did and said that she didn't like it
    but that I would because I'd agree with everything the father said.
    Not having seen it yet I couldn't defend myself on that charge.
    	
    					- Vick
710.810 yr old boy likes itAIAG::NEILPThu Jan 02 1992 21:375
My 10 year old son saw it with his Mom, and he liked it a lot -- so much so
that  he wants to see it again with me. Our daughters 14 and 17 chose not to
see it. 

 Neil
710.9nothing to do with "men" in particular...CURRNT::ALFORDAn elephant is a mouse with an operating systemTue Jan 07 1992 09:1013
>    I saw this movie a couple of weeks ago and I was repulsed to see a
>    family spend $125K just on one *day* 


Oh, I don't know....assuming that this money was not borrowed...I'd have
thought that this was a fairly reasonable - drastic/excessive maybe - way
of re-distributing wealth in the community.  


Everyone has the right to choose what he/she spends his/her money on, granted
he/she could/should expect to be able to handle the torpedoes if they choose 
to spend on socially unpopular things/causes.
710.10DELNI::STHILAIREthat squealin' feelin'Tue Jan 07 1992 10:3013
    re .9, yes, everyone has a right to spend their money on whatever they
    want, and I have a right to criticize it, which is what I did.
    
    I really don't see how the wedding spread the wealth around all that
    much.  It didn't give jobs to all the people recently layed off from
    hi-tech companies, it didn't give jobs to layed off assembly workers. 
    All it did was give a few more bucks to a ditsy, already well-off,
    wedding planner (Martin SHort's character), a florist, a caterer, and
    whoever sells wedding gowns.  Big deal.  I don't see where much of the
    economy is made better off by that.
    
    Lorna
    
710.11NOTIME::SACKSGerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085Tue Jan 07 1992 13:361
What about the waitrons, kitchen help, garment workers, etc.?
710.12R2ME2::BENNISONVictor L. Bennison DTN 381-2156 ZK2-3/R56Tue Jan 07 1992 15:004
    And whoever makes the bucks, has bucks to spend, further pumping
    money into the economy.  I don't know.  I have mixed emotions about
    it.
    					- Vick
710.13DELNI::STHILAIREthat squealin' feelin'Tue Jan 07 1992 18:3616
    re .11, .12, but the point is that, regardless of whether or not the
    economy is helped when one person spends $125K on a wedding, it just
    felt wrong to me to see so much money spent in such a frivolous way, at
    a time when so many people and causes in our society (shelters and food
    for the homeless, AIDS research, whatever) could use that amount of
    money to do good.  .0 asked for people's responses to the movie, and
    that was my main response.  Of course, it goes along with the fact that
    I have always considered expensive weddings to be a waste of money,
    anyway, and wouldn't care about having one myself.  I honestly think,
    though, that had I that amount of money to spend on one day, I would
    not feel right about spending it on what is basically a party, not when
    so many in our society are going without so much right now.  This is
    just my personal choice and my personal response to the movie.
    
    Lorna
    
710.14TENAYA::RAHRobert HoltWed Jan 08 1992 00:174
    
    its great to see that people can still party hearty when appropriate.
    
    ZZ
710.15DELNI::STHILAIREthat squealin' feelin'Wed Jan 08 1992 10:449
    re .14, since when did spending a lot of money mean that people were
    able to party hearty?  (people should be able to party hearty with a
    couple of beers & a joint)  
    
    Also, it's a matter of opinion as to whether a wedding is the
    appropriate time to party hearty.  :-)
    
    Lorna
    
710.16reply to LornaTNPUBS::STEINHARTTue Jan 14 1992 18:0750
    Lorna,
    
    Hope I'm not being impudent or anything, but.  Are you just saying that
    YOU wouldn't blow a wad on a wedding, or are you saying that OTHER
    people shouldn't do so?
    
    If YOU wouldn't do so, that's your business.  It's your life, your
    money, your marriage, your choice to give to charity (an admirable
    intention, btw).
    
    If you are saying OTHER people are wrong to do so, then follow through
    your logic.  What if others blow a wad on an expensive vacation?  What
    if others buy an expensive ball gown and wear it once?  What if others
    buy a case of Champagne and drink it in one night with their friends?
    Are all these things wrong, too?
    
    What do all these splurges have in common?
    
       - Pleasure
       - Big money goes fast
       - (possibly) ostentatious
    
    Now try these examples:  Others spend $2000 on a living room couch
    upholstered in white silk?  Others buy a luxury car?  
    
    What do these examples have in common?
    
       - Pleasure
       - Big money goes more slowly
       - (probably) ostentatious
    
    Now.  What if others sock away all their $$ and there's enough to
    retire in style, with plenty left over for inheritance?  It's:
    
       - Pleasure
       - Big money goes very slowly
       - Delayed gratification
       - (possibly) ostentatious?
       - Taking care of others
    
    What I'm asking is, what exactly is the problem with big weddings?
    I just don't understand where you are coming from.  I would like to
    understand your logic and see how it applies to other situations.
    
    Lots of people would reason that its their money to spend as they
    please.  They may be generous charity donors as well.  Having a big
    wedding and giving to charity are not mutually exclusive, by the way.
    
    Please explain.  Thanks.
    Laura
710.17WASTED::tomgMy paradigm is brokenTue Jan 14 1992 18:2912
IMO, money spent on a big wedding could be better used to give
the newlyweds a little "starting out"  nest egg.  That 10 (or more 
grand) spend could make a nice little down payment on a house,
for example.

Having a nice wedding doesn't mean you have to spend big bucks.

Just my 2c worth.

-Tom
(Who didn't have a big wedding...)
710.18FMNIST::olsonDoug Olson, ISVG West, Mtn View CATue Jan 14 1992 20:454
Laura, ask Lorna about blowing a wad on antique jewelry, to see if it's
justifiable.  (Sorry, Lorna, just teasing ;-).

DougO
710.19DELNI::STHILAIREFood, Shelter & DiamondsWed Jan 15 1992 13:1525
    re .18, yeah, Doug, like I've ever spent $125K on antique jewelry!!! 
    And, the only reason I ever would, would be if it was for merchandise
    to resell in an antique store, if I had one.  You *better* be only
    teasing!  :-)
    
    re .17, I agree with Tom.
    
    re .Laura, I don't understand what I'm expected to explain.  As I
    stated I think it's a waste of money to spend $125K on one day, on a
    wedding.  It's my opinion and if I had the money I would feel that I
    should use it in a way that I would consider to be more responsible. 
    That's what I said and that's what I meant.  
    
    What I think other people should do seems irrelevant since they aren't
    going to do what I say anyway.  However, that doesn't mean that can't
    have an opinion of what they do.  I can have an opinion about anything
    I want to have an opinion about.
    
    I don't think that spending $125K on a wedding is comparable to
    spending it on a car (altho it would be quite a car), or on a trip. 
    Cars and trips last longer than weddings, and trips are educational and
    help people grow and learn.
    
    Lorna
    
710.20CRONIC::SCHULERBuild a bridge and get over it.Wed Jan 15 1992 17:523
    Hmmm... the memories of a $125K wedding would last a long time...
    
    
710.21GOOEY::RUSTWed Jan 15 1992 18:0620
    Now, wait a minute. The movie's supposed to be a comedy, right? So what
    could be funnier than a society that half-hoodwinks, half-blackmails
    people into believing that spending that kind of money on a one-day
    affair will (a) make it The Most Wonderful Day Of Their Lives, and (b)
    have anything at all to do with the significance and sincerity of the
    marriage vows? ;-) 
    
    [Judith Martin, aka Miss Manners, suggests that the purpose of
    elaborate wedding rituals is to serve as a trial by ordeal for the
    betrothed pair and their families. If everybody can get through it
    without causing permanent rifts, the marriage should be a success.]
    
    I'm not into Hollywood or Royal Victorian weddings, myself, but if
    somebody wants one and can afford it, they should go for it. [I'll admit
    that I cringe when I hear some young thing carrying on about the
    incredibly costly affair that she's sure she can convince her
    parents to finance; I'm inclined to think that nobody should get
    married if they can't afford to pay for it themselves!]
    
    -b
710.22WLDBIL::KILGOREDCU Elections -- Vote for a change...Wed Jan 15 1992 18:143
    
    ...just keep repeating:  It's only a movie... Its only a movie... It's...
    
710.24CRONIC::SCHULERBuild a bridge and get over it.Thu Jan 16 1992 12:366
    Well I'm not looking for them myself, Mike......but if I happen
    to run into any I'll let you know...
    
    /Greg
    
    PS - glad to see you back in notes
710.25Got a lump in my throatVINO::MACNEILTue Jan 21 1992 15:3431
	I saw Father of the Bride out in Leominster Saturday night.  I 
	laughed a lot at the interplay between Matin Short as the 
	extravagant and artistic wedding planner and Steve Martin
	as the would-be frugal customer.

	I also found the movie brought out lots of emotion.  I think it 
	would for anyone who's had the satisfactions of having a 
	daughter, such as hearing that burp come up after bottle-feeding
	her as an infant or, years later, watching her nervously but 
	successfully follow the instructions during her driver's license
	road test.   I don't know many experiences in life that can 
	give one the feelings of being loved and needed, useful and 
	important more than having a little daughter.  Steve
	Martin's character grudgingly accepts the end of that role in
	his daughter's life.

	On the other hand,  I don't know if a teenaged girl would enjoy 
	this movie because it's pretty sentimental and I think most 
	teenagers enjoy looking  forward more than looking back.

	On the issue of the cost of the wedding,  I felt that the 
	movie was making a little ironic humor out of the Father 
	having to pay dearly for the wedding ( the end of his
	daughter's childhood) which he didn't want in the first place.
	The higher the price, the higher the irony.  [My own 
	preference regarding wedding cost would be for the cap in 
	political campaign contributions be extended to cover 
	weddings.]
	
						J.