*** Official "SHALLOW HAL" Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Holadem]

what I find strange is why Hal didn't see Mauricio any differently?

It doesn't work with people he knew before the "curse" (for me itsa curse)
The nurse seemed to have surprised a lot of people, while I think it was pretty obvious from day one: In a movie with this topic, an extremely ugly personis there for a reason. On the other hand, what did surprise me was the little girl. I didn't see that one coming at all.
--
Holadem

 

[JohnS]

Holadem is right, becuase the co-workers of Hal ALSO looked the same!
------------------
[Edited last by JohnS on November 14, 2001 at 11:46 AM]

 

[Graeme Clark]

Does Hal get to feel the inner beauty too? Would be kind of funny if he hugs Rosemany and there's this weird forcefield around her.
------------------

 

[Jeffrey Noel]

Graeme, no Hal does not get to feel her actual size. Something about his brain "feels" what he perceives as real. Not the exact story but something like that!
------------------
God bless!
jeffrey noel
My DVD Collection

 

[Todd H]

I saw it over the weekend and liked it. It wasn't as slapstick as I thought it would be, but it was still funny. I thought Jack Black did a great job, as did Gwenyth Paltrow. She played her part perfectly. The one part that really touched me was when Hal saw the little girl in the burn unit as she really is. That's when his character turned the corner. Overall, I'd recommend it.
[Edited last by Todd H on November 15, 2001 at 02:20 PM]

 

[Janna S]

I went to Shallow Hal not sure what to expect, despite having read reviews and discussion threads - and I really enjoyed it. I am amazed that the Farrelly bros., the reigning experts at crass jokes, made a film this straight and interesting. (I am not a big fan of comedy, slapstick, bathroom humor, etc., which I am sure is no surprise to those of you who've read my always too-serious posts.)
Paltrow was wonderful in her portrayal of a woman who has never been desirable being faced with compliments, romance, and the magic of being desired. Black did a good job of playing a guy who let his head catch up to his heart. Alexander is the jerk he always is, which was right for this film.
I was afraid they'd turn Paltrow back into the thin stunner at the end as some kind of some "reward for good behavior." I was pleasantly surprised when they let the fat girl get the guy. As a next step, it would be nice to see the fat/ugly/disabled person get the girl/guy without fat/ugly/disability being the focus of the story so much of the time.
Maybe this film lacked slapstick or turned into too much of a chick flick for guys who were expecting gross humor - or maybe watching fat, unattractive women qualifies as gross humor in and of itself.
Question - did he see the "inner ugly" in any guys? He saw "surface ugly" women who looked beautiful to him, and "surface beautiful" women who looked ugly to him , and a couple of "surface ugly" guys who looked handsome to him. But did he see any "surface handsome" guys who looked ugly to him?
Hey - I really don't turn everything into a gender debate - I just don't remember if he saw any handsome outside/ugly inside guys the way he saw such women. If not, does that mean he was only shallow when it came to viewing women? Or that guys are no different on the outside than they are on the inside?

 

[Patrick Sun]

For me, this film gave me many nervous laughs throughout the film. The laughs were basically on simmer mode until the Farelley predictable ending.
But since it entertained me, and I was laughing through all the small jokes, cruel as they were, I saw through all that crudeness, and saw that the movie had heart. And that's the moral of the story here. Damn that Tony Robbins!
BTW, I couldn't believe it when the "hot" nurse showed up in the SUV (while Hal was going to get chips and dip for Rose-Marie) because that actress, Sascha Knopf, posed as Vampirella in a polaroid with me way back in 1995 at some comic book convention. If I can find a scan of it, I'll post it.
------------------
PatCave; HT Pix; Gear; DIY Mains; DIY CC; Sunosub I + II + III; DVDs; Link Removed

 

[Mark Dubbelboer]

ugh

based solely on what i saw from the trailer i went in expecting an amusing movie.

There was a couple times i chuckled but i found most of the jokes incredibly rude and insenstive and just not funny. The guy in front of me was killing himself laughing at all the fat jokes and his gf was totally starring daggers at him.

breaking a chair/booth...oh how drole

I thought the movie was quite predictable, as soon as Tony Robbins did his "thing" you could always tell that hal was seeing the inner beauty and they'd end up being nasty. The scene in the SUV didn't seem confusing to me.

and why was it only nasty chicks that ended up having inner beauty?

oh and just to show that i'm not overly sensitive, i found the funniest part when alexander was explaining the "ugly ducking syndrome"

mark

 

[David Ren]

Looks may not be everything but it is certainly important when choosing a partner and people shouldn't be labeled "shallow" or "superficial". In my opinion, it's about 50% looks/50% personality. I don't think that makes me shallow. We are naturally attracted to beautiful people. It is nature. Even if the girl is perfect in every other way, she's only got 50% if she's ugly. How will I get "up" to it, sexually, if you know what I mean?

How did all the ugly girls in the movie have "inner beauty" anyway? All the ugly girls I met are mean, bitter, and socially-inept, always whining about how men are "shallow" and can't see their inner beauty. These women have no inner beauty. In contrast, the beautiful women I've met are more fun, nice, and have great sense of humors. They are not pissed off at the world and they are more happy. I dunno about you, but I prefer to be around happy people more than pissed-off people.

I hate the stereotype in Hollywood where good looking people = dull, boring people and ugly/fat people = saints. Then again, most screenwriters are rather ugly so maybe that's why.

Some people are born beautiful. Some people are ugly. Some people are born smart. Some people are born with great personalities (not 100% but a great deal of your personality is genetic.) Why is it perfectly acceptable to appreciate people for their intelligence and personality but to like them for their looks, it's considered shallow. All three qualities are something we are born with and something we cannot change (for the most part). I find this really unfair to the good looking people. A model makes a lot of money because they're good looking. A doctor makes a lot of money because they're smart. Yet a doctor is a more respected progession than a model. Why? Because the doctor had to "work for it"? No, he was just

born more intelligent just as a model was born more attractive.

Models have to work for it too. There are a lot of beautiful girls who could be models but too lazy to get off their asses and do something. Personality, looks, intelligence = All are qualities we are born with and therefore all should be considered shallow. If it is shallow to like someone because they're beautiful, it's also shallow to like someone because of inner beauty.

Another problem I had with the movie is that they are saying: it's okay to be a fat ass. Hollywood has always made movies

like this where some fat slob finds true love.

Gluttony is a sin! In America though, it's not right to make fun of fat people. In America, fat is sacred. I find it ironic how American girls are the most weight obsessed but America is the FATTEST country in the world. Fat is not healthy. It's not beautiful. It's downright disgusting.

How is Jack Black gonna spend the rest of his life with Rosemary if she's gonna die of a heart attack in five years?

 

[ikiru]

I havent seen the movie, but the way it looks to present its message kinda unnerves me. Im not so sure that I appreciate the fact that fat people are considered ugly in this film. I know that looks are important in a relationship, but that does not translate into fat=ugly. I guess a fat person is more marketable than, say, a disfigured person.

-ikiru

 

[Patrick Sun]

Rose Marie (Gwynneth Paltrow) happens to be fat in this film. Hal saw the inner beauty of some other women who looked pretty gnarly but were skinny (like the Brook Burns character), so it wasn't just that fat=ugly, the Farrelley Brothers went for the whole gamut of ugliness in this film.

 

[Russ Lucas]

I'll resurrect this dying thread to add that my wife and I enjoyed this movie. It certainly isn't perfect-- it starts a bit slower than it should and, while I enjoy him greatly in supporting roles, I'm not yet convinced that Black can carry a whole movie like this on his back.

All of the fat joke-type laughs are in the trailer, and so I'm not surprised if folks who went in looking for that kind of humor were disappointed. That may have been the case with the largely high-school age audience I saw the movie with; they were likely drawn in by the trailer and the lure of another movie like There's Something About Mary. Having hooked the kid audience thus, the Farrellys gave them something much better: a movie that shows them how much tenderness and beauty they will miss in life if they persist in dismissing people based on their physical deformities. Maybe that's a cliched message, especially coming from a film industry that reflexively sells nearly all its movies based in the appearance of its actors, but the Farrellys' filmography has gained them enough "sreet cred" to pull it off here.

One reason why I think they were able to make the simple message resonate is because they're not afraid to put "imperfect" people in front of the camera and let the audience react to them, going back to the handicapped brother in Mary and continuing here with the character with spina bifida, the hospitalized children and Rosemary and her Peace Corps brethren. I think they've found a "middle way" to treat the disabled in film, and that their approach might ultimately be the best one in creating a new aesthetic that includes "imperfect-looking" people in Hollywood films. For a long while, it seems to me, there've been two mutually exclusive methods in portraying the disabled in movies. At one end of the spectrum, out of discomfort or insensitivity, they are ignored or omitted. At the other end of the spectrum, whether borne out of political correctness or whatever, every portrayal of a disabled person is just a My Left Foot-type triumph over adversity and the prejudices of the rest of the world, with little room for humor or complexity. The Farrellys, through this movie and Mary, show that the impulse-- whether natural, or nervous, or whatever-- to find humor in that which is different can be pulled off in a way that doesn't demean the person being laughed at.

I'd love to have a discussion group with high school kids about this movie. That also goes for the p.c. folks who believe that any attempt to portray disability in anything other than hushed, reverential tones is insensitive. Kudos to the Farrelly brothers for sucking in the former group with the triler and their past reputation. I wish some of the early scenes hadn't fell so flat, but the movie's got a huge heart, and a pretty good head on its shoulders, too.

 

[Robert_eb]

The dvd comes out tomorrow. Reading this thread I may just rent it first.