MovieChat Forums > Big Miracle (2012) Discussion > Fred, Wilma and BAM-BAM?!

Fred, Wilma and BAM-BAM?!

posted 13 years ago by eppichs
37 replies | jump to latest

I know, I know. It's such a silly thing to get hooked up on BUT every time I see the trailer this irks me SO much! I have no idea why it annoys me so strongly! D: Someone said they explain it in the movie but the explanation doesn't make sense to me. If the younger whale was a boy then why didn't they call the whales Barney, Betty and Bam-Bam!? It would work so much better, right? Would make sense and I would still get the Flintstone reference, as I'm sure others would!

Please don't hate me for this irksome annoyance but I can't help being so annoyed by it! Arrrrghhhhhh hahaha

[–] batfilm 12 years ago

Actualley, if they were going to change details, they could¡e changed the sex of the baby whale, so they could be Fred, Welva an Pebbles...
I mean is they go for that route, they should have made it complete.

[–] itchyfriend9 12 years ago

The show was about Fred and Wilma. Those are the names that are iconic and instantly recognizable. Why would they name the whales Barney and Betty just for the sake of consistency with a cartoon family?

It annoys me that so many people are annoyed by this.

I know everything about film. I've seen over 240 of them.

[–] thereseuphemiaabernathy 12 years ago

Co-stars Barney and Betty are almost just as recognizable. It would've made much more sense to call them that, as the whales are a family too, and there's nothing wrong with consistency...or, as someone else said, make the baby a girl and call her Pebbles. Either way, I wish they just hadn't even changed them at all. Even though the Flintstones names are cute, and Bamm-Bamm does seem kind of appropriate for a young whale.

[–] itchyfriend9 12 years ago

Well, it's not so much a question of why the writers would name them that, but why the characters would name them that. Specifically, the John Krasinski character, who is the one who names them. There are two whales, a male and female. Okay, Fred and Wilma. And a baby, Pebbles. Oops, no, it's a male, so let's call him Bamm-Bamm. It's a reasonable thought process for that character to make (he even explains it in the movie). More reasonable than him giving a crap that Bamm-Bamm wasn't Fred and Wilma's son.

I know everything about film. I've seen over 240 of them.

[–] thereseuphemiaabernathy 12 years ago

Yeah, I can see how they'd find that reasonable, and it's more about the cuteness of it than anything, I suppose...Fred and Wilma could be baby-sitting Bamm-Bamm, maybe. Still, I think that in that position I would switch and keep the idea of an actual Flintstones family--since the baby's a male, I'd have named the parents Barney and Betty instead. Sure, it would have then been preferable to also have a Fred, Wilma, and Pebbles in that situation, but I think people would recognize the names almost just as quickly...especially when they hear Bamm-Bamm. It's a minor thing; nothing to get too irked over, really. But it's sort of like someone having two pets named Fred and Ethel; that'd be just as funny/cute as naming them Lucy and Ricky. ^^

[–] Carycomic 11 years ago

I agree with you, IF. But, to paraphrase a certain Daywalker: "Some argumentative a**holes always got to skate uphill."

[–] vusang199915 12 years ago

I think the baby's name is Bamn Bamn. And it's okay! Actually I found it cute! =='

[–] Carycomic 11 years ago

Me, too. :-)

"If sanity were beer, I'd be five cans short of a six-pack."