MovieChat Forums > Freaky Friday (1977) Discussion > can't believe some people prefer THIS on...

can't believe some people prefer THIS one


Is it just nostalgia? Or just feeling that everything from "back in the day" was better? A lot of stuff in this movie was just plain bad. The newer version, while hardly an all-time classic, did a good job with it and avoided any major problems like these.

-- The scene where about 10 visitors show up one after another. The mom, Ellen, wouldn't have been able to handle all that chaos anyway. Plus it's hardly a normal day in the life of a mother. Isn't this movie supposed to be about how they wouldn't want to experience each other's everyday life?

-- Ellen-as-Annabel is clueless beyond what is believable. Yes, I know she's SUPPOSED to be confused about how to act in her daughter's life. But she keeps calling people "young lady" and never stops doing it, she has no idea that giving a class-long speech is considered unusual. I can't help but think about the poor writing when this happens.

-- The boy across the street doesn't seem ANYTHING like any human being I have ever heard of. All I could think is "why did they make him act like that? is he supposed to be mentally retarded?"

-- Very random and pointless car chase scene, and it didn't seem to have any consequences at all. Again, is starting a high speed car chase something that a girl like Annabel is supposed to do? It was amusing at least to see all the Dukes of Hazzard police cars after seeing Boss Hogg as the principal.

-- Speaking of which, I can't even begin to explain the parent/teacher/principal meeting. Very weird and hard to understand situation there.

-- When they switch back at the end, their bodies are in the wrong places. Why?

-- Probably worst of all is the climax of the movie. Let me get this straight- the dad has some random business meeting, which happens to take place on a floating raft on the water, and for some reason it's vitally important that his daughter puts on a water-skiing show? Then when the raft sinks into the water, the natural reaction of all the important business is to LAUGH?

There are just so many "WTF" moments that distract you from enjoying the movie. I don't see how anyone can prefer this when there are so many bad scenes.

On a side note, I watched this movie just because I'm a Jodie Foster fan. I don't know if it's the acting or writing or what, but I was really bored and not entertained by her scenes. Instead, Barbara Harris (the mother) was the star of the movie. She did a great job of acting like a kid, and her scenes with the boy across the street, and interacting with Annabel's brother, were the best parts of the movie. In the remake, it was the other way around, with Lindsay Lohan getting the better scenes.

reply

The idea of Lindsay 'Moron' Lohan reinterpreting Anabel Andrews as your average, dumb wannabe-porn-star-or-rock-star-type character is bad enough, but to suggest that it tops the original Foster portrayal demands immediate self-revaluation and penance.

Warning: If you're under 25 and believe that the remake is better than the original, and that "Lindsay Lohan is, like, really cool, dude", then you will not go anywhere in life. If you're 25 or older and think similar thoughts, then you probably HAVEN'T gone anywhere in life.

The mere thought of Lindsay Lohan, and I can taste the vomit starting to rise.

Incidently, if anyone out there ever gets the chance to talk with Lohan, please do me a favour and ask her is she geared towards the logical positivist strain of thinking, or is she more of an adherent to existentialism; and if it's the latter, and she's firmly convinced that existence precedes essence, does she lean more towards the Sartrian school of thought (relying upon such concepts as 'bad faith' and the reduction of The Other to the level of Object being the only truly unpardonable act), or the Heideggerian model (being thoroughly familiar with the intricacies of Sein Und Zeit). I would certainly cherish her response.

reply

Warning: If you're under 25 and believe that the remake is better than the original, and that "Lindsay Lohan is, like, really cool, dude", then you will not go anywhere in life. If you're 25 or older and think similar thoughts, then you probably HAVEN'T gone anywhere in life.

Now, now. Success and movie preference don't correlate. For example, I love this one and my life... let's not go there. But it is strange that Lindsay Lohan is in like every Disney remake: Freaky Friday, The Love Bug, The Parent Trap, ...


I have no taste, but that just means there's less of a chance that I'll get eaten

reply

What's all that to do with anything? An actress can be quite good at what she does without necessarily being geared towards the logical positivist strain of thinking or being an adherent to existentialism, or whatever. I am sure you feel pretty good about yourself now that you've proven yourself superior to everyone else on this thread because you can use three-, four- or even five-syllable words, but it doesn't prove your point. If the point that "If you're 25 or older and think similar thoughts, then you probably HAVEN'T gone anywhere in life" even needs to be proved. I, for one, find it pretty offensive and snobbish.

And "incidently", it's not "incidently". It's "incidentally".

reply

[deleted]

*pats little dog on the back* Thank you! You pretty much said (re: R-W Watkins) exactly what I was thinking (and more), but the only thing I'd add is: "Any given poster here could type 'www.thesaurus.com' into his/her web browser right now, and appear just as superior and intelligent."



"Are you hinting my apples aren't what they ought to be?" -The Wizard of Oz (1939)

reply

Another thing I can't understand (and this is not just a jab at Mr. Watkins--I see a lot of it go on around these boards--nor is it a thumbs-up to Lindsay) is why people, who come here and claim to be movie fans, judge an actor or actress for who he or she is IN REAL LIFE, rather than giving he or she a chance, and judging them on how they actually portray a character.

Isn't the whole point of their JOB to be someone OTHER THAN their real-life selves?!


"Are you hinting my apples aren't what they ought to be?" -The Wizard of Oz (1939)

reply

I am guessing that you don't enjoy many films that where made before.. lets say the late 80's.

It's not nostalgia, it represents a comical view of how life was when the film was made. You have to keep in mind that this is a Disney film. It's sad to think that you youngins are missing out on a lot, just because you can't wrap your minds around old school ways.


With all this being said I did enjoy the remake. It's just silly to compare the two.

reply

[deleted]

because some people still have taste,and don't just willfully swollow modern day crap like the plague of "remakes"that still continue to darken the horizon of almost every good movie made to date.they're even remaking footlose,gag!!


Rest in Peace~Heath Ledger~

reply

-- "When they switch back at the end, their bodies are in the wrong places. Why?"

This isn't necessarily incorrect. They said they wanted to be themselves again and they were. And so the bodies went where the minds were. Either way could've been correct.

And I agree with the previous comments. Just watch it and have fun.

I also think because the author was also the screenwriter, there was some sentiment in keeping in similar to the book, but not everythin translates well.

reply

[deleted]

To R-W-Watkins and floacism, I must say that I completely agree with your point of view and opinion. As much as I am a fna of Jamie Lee Curtis, the original is far FAR better than the rehash...err.. remake. Annabelle in the original was more genuine, realistic and not a little tart. Oh wait, Lohan wasn;t really acting- she was just being herself- a pretentous know it all.

As much as I'd like to give today's teens the benefit of the doubt, I'm tired of hearing them whine on and on about how the remake of a given movie/song/television show is miles ahead the original. Be it the Parent Trap, Freaky Friday or any other form of entertainment, the sad fact is regardless of how good the original is or how bad the remake is, becuase its not "now" or current or "in", the original will fare poorly in the eyes of today's teens and children, who cannot by any means stretch their wee little minds around anything more than a nonosecond. Blame it on Ipods, the internet or short attention span, the end result is that children and teens today don't appreciate the finer things in life. If its not media driven, its not for them, apparently.

Case in point- I am tired of seeing 12 year olds wearing t-shirts emblazoned with "1975 Track" or some other sports-themed logo from even before my birth (1981). No, you weren't there, no it wasn't about you, don't make it about you. I was wearing Nikes before there was "air" and Reeboks before "insta pump"- in fact, I was wearing ProWings before you could buy them at Target, so please don't tell me how its not about me, its about you, becuase frankly my dear, it sure as hell isn't about you. It won't be for another twenty years- when you have children.

reply

I think you need to get over it... so what if people prefer the origional? Each to their own.

reply

This is actually my favorite live action Disney movie. :)

reply

well I am one of those people



When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth...

reply