MovieChat Forums > Little Darlings (1980) Discussion > Did anybody else think this was a LITTLE...

Did anybody else think this was a LITTLE inappropriate?

posted 16 years ago by jenni_doll_1
31 replies | jump to latest

Maybe I'm a little overly prudent, but a bunch of fully developed teenage girls doing jumping jacks in bathing suits in front of a male counselor? Something just doesn't seem quite right about that and I would have felt a little uncomfortable if I was one of those girls OR the male counselor for that matter. Especially when one of the girls made the comment, "Mr. Callahan, doesn't Ferris have great legs?" If nothing else, that right then and there should have been a sign to him that it would probably be a good idea for him to get a female counselor to lead this activity or at least be present for it. I'd also like to know why he didn't think twice about allowing 15 year old Ferris all alone into his cabin late at night with no one else there. The appearances alone of that left alot of assumptions and accusations to be made and things said that shouldn't be, things that could have gotten him not only fired but arrested. I would think for that reason alone the camp would have had rules against that type of fraternization. The rumors that insued by her lying to her friends were harmful enough, but it could have been worse. What if after rejecting her, she got mad and decided to get even with him by saying he tried to rape her? It really shouldn't have surprised him that his lack of judgment caused him trouble. The minute that girl showed up, he should have told her to go right back to her cabin, not let her inside. CYA GUYS! NEVER allow yourself to be alone in a private setting with an underage girl you don't know well. It's a recipe for potential disaster.

[–] Connie_n_Raymond_Marble 14 years ago

It wasn't inappropriate considering the time. The 80s were a completely different era. The PC police hadn't been formed yet. The word "inappropriate" (which I absolutely DETEST) wasn't on EVERYONE'S tongue. Things were more laid-back. People weren't SEARCHING for a reason to be offended--and, as a consequence, rarely were--at least compared to the way they are today. How I wish we could go back to that time--a time before the whole "victim" mentality took over the world.

We'll see whose the filthiest person alive! We'll just see!

[–] amy0292 14 years ago

Then why on earth did you decide to watch the movie? Prude....

[–] jenni_doll_1 14 years ago

Just because I might have thought ONE thing in the movie seemed a little odd to me doesn't mean I have a problem with the movie as a whole. How would I have even KNOWN about that scene without first seeing it? It's just a passing thought, jeez, no need to get personal.

[–] phosphorusD200 14 years ago

I was about the same age as Angel and Ferris when Little Darlings hit the cinemas, and I can assure you that this scene did not seem "inappropriate" to us then - although we were very aware of teachers behaving odd and inappropriate. After all, our math and physics teacher gave us the creeps every day, and we girls always made sure we were never alone with him in the laboratory, he was awful enough in the class room, when others were around. He always did it in a very subtle way, and we knew it wouldn't make sense to complain about him, no other teacher would believe us anyway. And we were right. Because a few years later, when his inappropriate behaviour became less subtle, girls complained about him.* The other teachers did not believe them and dismissed it as schoolgirls' fantasies. Which was ironic, since the guy was quite ugly and smelled awful.

I'm surprised you considered that particular scene with the jumpung jacks as inappropriate and not the one where Ferris visits Gary in his hut at night, when he sits down with her on the couch, very close to her. Doesn't he even put his arm around her?

* I met one of those girls a few years after that happened. He told the girls in class they'd have to sit on his lap if they wanted him to explain something a second or third time.

[–] jenni_doll_1 14 years ago

"I'm surprised you considered that particular scene with the jumpung jacks as inappropriate and not the one where Ferris visits Gary in his hut at night, when he sits down with her on the couch, very close to her. Doesn't he even put his arm around her? "

I DID. Didn't you read my original post? I actually addressed that cabin scene a bit more than the exercise scene.

[–] phosphorusD200 14 years ago

Oh, sorry, I read your post the other day but the part about the cabin scene didn't stick to my mind. I only remembered the exercise scene because your concern puzzled me a bit.

[–] thechangeling 14 years ago

Given the stuff we have today? Please. I remember in middle school, thinking my PE gym teacher was gorgeous. Of course, he couldn't care less about me or the hundred other girls in his class. But today of course, let the double-standard apply. Young boys lusting after their hot female teacher is considered ok, acceptable. This movie is nothing compared to what is being showed on basic TV today.

[–] macgirl66 13 years ago

I'm not sure how old these girls are supposed to be. Do they ever say? Angel and Ferris and Cinder seem older than perhaps some of the others. 16 at least. I don't know where you all went to school. I was out of the country during my junior year. When I got back mid senior year, I found out that the majority of my senior class had lost their virginity somewhere between 16 and 18 (or so I was told). I graduated in 1985. So not much different than this movie for age. There were a small minority of virgins at graduation, but not a lot.

This is of course, a movie and would not have a plot without Mr Callahan behaving the way he did. I think the film was meant to highlight not just the contest and how peer pressure can force young women into situations they are not emotionally ready for, just to fit in with the "clique", but also where Mr. Callahan fails to draw the appropriate lines between himself and a camper, Ferris. I think in his honest desire in wanting to help her with her emotional problems, he did get to know her and became friendly with her. His mistake was allowing the breakdown of the counselor/camper boundary and allowing things to become too personal. He willingly put himself in a vulnerable position.

To each their own...opinion

[–] Tracey73 13 years ago

I'm not sure how old these girls are supposed to be. Do they ever say? Angel and Ferris and Cinder seem older than perhaps some of the others.

It's been awhile since I watched this, but I'm pretty sure Angel & Ferris are both supposed to be 15. Cinder, though, might have been a little older ...

I'm reaching for the life within me. How can one man stop his ending. ~ Blue October

[–] benilana 13 years ago

This movie came out when I was 12 and was one of my favorite movies of all times. I also remember thinking Mr. Callahan was inappropriate or just stupid. I still remember being creeped out during the scene where he's teaching Ferris to swim: he does not even try to hide that he's leering at her booty!

[–] nycruise-1 13 years ago

Okay - I don't think you get it.

Back when this movie was made, the Sexual Revolution of the 1970s was entering its next phase - total sexual freedom without guilt: as such, as part of that, young teenage girls were contemplating what sex was all about - in the total physical sense.

A year later, the AIDS crisis would ignite, ending any thoughts on how sex and losing one's virginity was simply a matter of coming-of-age.

We think differently now, including thinking differently about teenage girls and their crushes on adult male high-school/camp instructors.

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

[–] macgirl66 13 years ago

nycruise-1, I think you are the one who is not getting it. Teenage girls have always spent considerable time contemplating what seX is all about, including fantasizing about what it would be like to have seX with all kinds of people, including older people and adults. Teenage girls are as horny as teenage boys today, just like they were in the 90's, 80's and in the 70's when this movie was made. However, what you are missing is that this was not some Woodstock concert where people went to "congregate" and test out their new feelings of seXual power. This was a teenage girls camp where parents sent their children to be enriched, challenged and entertained, as well as supervised and kept safe by supposed responsible adult counselors. Parents have been sending their kids to these camps for decades, not for the purpose of seX education or to get laid by their adult counselors (however much girls might be chatting about seX while they're there!). It would have been as scandalous then to have a teenage girl "seduced" by an adult male counselor as it would be now, if not more so. This camp in the movie is no "free love, loose rules" camp. If you believe it was, then I think you watched a different movie.

Also, if you think that the era of AIDS has stopped teenagers from losing their virginity or from having seX you are not looking at the facts. Teens are having seX at earlier ages all the time, and teen pregnancy in the US has only just dropped for the first time (in 2009), whereas the rate had been steadily increasing since 1946. The US has 9 times the rate of teen mothers than other developed countries, according to the CDC. So no, AIDS is not stopping our young folks from having seX or losing their virginity. They believe this drop is not from a reduction in seXual activity, but from a better application of contraception.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57411981-10391704/u.s-teen-pregnancy-rates-at-an-all-time-low-across-all-ethnicities/

To each their own...opinion

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]