i guess, one problem she has is that looking back, she regrets that John Hughes' characters were not reflective of the way people are in real life: perfect. no boy in high school has ever peaked under a skirt, none has ever made a bet with his friends about getting with a girl.
-
-
-
high school boys are all known to be paragons of virtue and would never sexually harass a girl in school. how dare this man pretend to know what high school boys are like, and still write them as such aggressive, confused, not evolved creatures. nothing in art should show human
-
behavior as anything exploitative, unfeeling, or callous. all films about teens should reflect the way they really are, and be more like episodes of "leave it to beaver" and less like (oh my shock and horror) "sixteen candles." let us go back and revisit every character ever
-
written and excoriate the writer for having created him/her as flawed people, and indicative of the time in which they lived. Hawkeye Pierce was a moral hypocrite who sexually harassed every woman he ever met. more than once he sexually assaulted Hot Lips by grabbing her and
-
forcing an unwanted kiss upon her. but let's not discuss the behavior of the character (and how that would be seen today - and how it is indicative of the number of women in the military who are sexually assaulted by peers) - but the character of the writers who wrote him!
-
if you are going to put John Hughes through the
#MeToo
ringer, how about discussing now how he wrote characters, but how he treated YOU as a human being? was his own behavior respectful, or was he more like his characters, because that is the only way to be fair to him. if you -
-
downright dangerous to it. should writers not write real life into their works for fear that they might be judged by the actions of their characters? it is telling that you cannot understand how someone not specifically represented demographic in a film could relate to it on a
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
How could John's writing be so "inappropriate" considering it was normal back then? I will never apologize for how much better life was in the 80's than it is now with everyone wanting to be the bigger "victim". As we would have said back then, "Get over yourselves"!
-
Better for whom?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
This kind of article is why liberals loose battles they should win easy, exageration and over reaction turns even the most serious of topics into punchlines and makes any interesting point ridiculous and worthless. Bender rocks by the way, and Claire knows it.
-
bein a liberal, i kinda get tired of the whole thing, i guess its only a matter of time before someone will write how Jesus treated mary magdalene inappropriately, i respect what women have to deal with, but if everything is based on hindsight, we are ALL GUILTY of something.
-
This has the putrid aroma of concern trolling. The stench is concentrated in a few areas: 1) The bible is full of women being treated inappropriately so a critical look is not unwelcome.
-
"...but if everything is based on hindsight, we are ALL GUILTY of something." 2)Dear, that's probably because we often ARE. ("Willful blindness" is obe if the LESSER charges.)
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Molly this piece is extraordinary. Not just as a former subject and parent, but as a human being. Thank you for taking the time, effort and thoughtfulness to do more than revisit the past through the lens of nostalgia.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Inappropriate writing? What the hell is she talking about?
-
remember the part when Bender says “Close that door, we’ll get the prom queen impregnated” to emilio estevez abt Claire
-
So is Stephen King the next writer she goes after? This is writing. There are no boundries. That scene could be in a movie today. Was the druggie character supposed to be prince charming?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.