Jump to content
SlidePocket

Episode 219 - Drop Dead Fred: LIVE! (w/ Casey Wilson)

Drop Dead Fred  

79 members have voted

  1. 1. Which side do you agree with?

    • Team Fred 🤡
      31
    • Team Sanity 🤔
      48


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, muttnik said:

there's still stuff like keeping flowers in the house that she knows her child is allergic to

I was confused as to whether Lizzie was actually allergic to gladiolas or not.  If you notice, in every instance it is not until Fred points out that she is near the flowers that she starts sneezing.  If I walk into a person's house and they own cats, I will start sneezing automatically.  I don't need the owner to point out the fact that they own a cat for me to start sneezing.

The film had a tendency to drop in a lot of weird things like that they never really had any pay off.  Like the fact that in the one flashback, the headline on the paper states that we just landed on the moon.  Why choose such an iconic moment in history as your headline if it has nothing to do with anything else?  That said, because of that information, that would make Lizzie close to 30 if the adult scenes are to have taken place in 1991.

There's also the weird cop behavior after Lizzie and Fred go on their burglar trip.  They bust down the door of the house rather quickly and then immediately arrest the dad when there is no indication that he is the one who is actually robbing the place.  I briefly thought they were trying to suggest the dad ultimately left his family because he was tired of being the victim of Fred's and/or Lizzie's antics.

The "meet-cute" scene with Lizzie and Ron Eldard also seems to suggest storylines that never come to fruition.  The way the scene is filmed, he sets down his attache/briefcase in the middle of the floor, making me think he wanted her to trip over it and bump into him.  The fact that he inspires Lizzie to discover Fred again and that his daughter has bonded with Fred made me think that he was communicating with or working with Fred in some capacity.  Ron Eldard says that his divorce happened a couple of years ago, so it is never clear why he is at the courthouse on the day he sees Lizzie.  And why was he carrying a document that had a picture of his daughter attached to it?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I feel sort of convinced by both sides of the debate, and found this episode a blast to listen to.

On the other hand, somehow, the two sides of the debate as presented have made me like the movie even less than I already did.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, DrGuts1003 said:

I was confused as to whether Lizzie was actually allergic to gladiolas or not.  If you notice, in every instance it is not until Fred points out that she is near the flowers that she starts sneezing.  If I walk into a person's house and they own cats, I will start sneezing automatically.  I don't need the owner to point out the fact that they own a cat for me to start sneezing.

The film had a tendency to drop in a lot of weird things like that they never really had any pay off.  Like the fact that in the one flashback, the headline on the paper states that we just landed on the moon.  Why choose such an iconic moment in history as your headline if it has nothing to do with anything else?  That said, because of that information, that would make Lizzie close to 30 if the adult scenes are to have taken place in 1991.

There's also the weird cop behavior after Lizzie and Fred go on their burglar trip.  They bust down the door of the house rather quickly and then immediately arrest the dad when there is no indication that he is the one who is actually robbing the place.  I briefly thought they were trying to suggest the dad ultimately left his family because he was tired of being the victim of Fred's and/or Lizzie's antics.

The "meet-cute" scene with Lizzie and Ron Eldard also seems to suggest storylines that never come to fruition.  The way the scene is filmed, he sets down his attache/briefcase in the middle of the floor, making me think he wanted her to trip over it and bump into him.  The fact that he inspires Lizzie to discover Fred again and that his daughter has bonded with Fred made me think that he was communicating with or working with Fred in some capacity.  Ron Eldard says that his divorce happened a couple of years ago, so it is never clear why he is at the courthouse on the day he sees Lizzie.  And why was he carrying a document that had a picture of his daughter attached to it?

Pointing out the flowers beforehand seems like bad writing or a note for audience clarification (they did cause a reaction in her though). The cop thing, I have no explanation for that, it was silly in a bad way and should have been cut. Honestly, I hated the love interest character the most and felt he was unnecessary. I get the impulse to have that character, to show that she can be loved for who she is or might be, and Look! A decent man from the men we've been shown! He's the inverse of your terrible father!, but he was such a dip and I hated all of his scenes. Hated the bit with the daughter too, it doesn't help with the confusion about the movie's rules. A better ending for me would have been Elizabeth moving into her own place (even a throwaway line to Carrie about a new job), seeing a little neighbour girl very similar to her past self, and "giving" Fred to that kid.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, muttnik said:

 A better ending for me would have been Elizabeth moving into her own place (even a throwaway line to Carrie about a new job), seeing a little neighbour girl very similar to her past self, and "giving" Fred to that kid.

I agree that that would have been a better ending.  But if you're going to do the ending that they go with, then there needed to be more scenes with the daughter throughout the movie.  Show that her mother was similarly awful (hence why Ron Eldard got a divorce from her) and that now that Fred was no longer needed in Lizzie's life he could move on and help this girl instead.

BTW, I don't think this gets brought up in the episode, but the little girl also calls him Drop Dead Fred.  If he was simply a manifestation of Lizzie's mind, then that would be an awfully big coincidence that this little girl would give him the exact same name.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, DrGuts1003 said:

I agree that that would have been a better ending.  But if you're going to do the ending that they go with, then there needed to be more scenes with the daughter throughout the movie.  Show that her mother was similarly awful (hence why Ron Eldard got a divorce from her) and that now that Fred was no longer needed in Lizzie's life he could move on and help this girl instead.

 

Agree, or even the nanny whom she pulls the prank on at the end. There definitely needed to be a scene or two more of the daughter with an adult treating her awfully, perhaps before the lunch date.

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, muttnik said:

Whew, this episode was a roller coaster. I have so many thoughts, but I'll try to contain most of them because I do get why people dislike it. It is loud and over the top and there’s stuff that definitely could have been executed better. I would also hard agree that this is 100% not a kid’s movie. Much like Ace Venture was definitely not a kid's movie, but was shown to me and my peers repeatedly as a child.

Elizabeth’s mother was abusive. Period. Abuse may not have been her intention, but it’s what she was serving up. There’s the whole makeover scene where she styles her daughter exactly in her image. That’s friggin' nutso. Her daughter isn't allowed to be her own person!

Repeating someone’s name is like gaslighting douchebag abuse 101. Why marry Elizabeth at all? Because he was an abusive garbage monster who saw a dowdy, childlike dummy he could keep under his thumb that would keep house and play wife when he wanted, and would never leave him for chasing skirts all over town. He called her mother behind her back! He knew who the original abuser was and went right to the source to get Elizabeth back in line!

The only problem I have is that Carrie Fisher's character makes no logical sense any way I wrap my head around her. While I completely understand being as delicate as possible around a friend that's suffered long-term emotional abuse, at some point (I'd assume when she renders you homeless and then comes into your serious place of employment) you have to be firm and put your foot down.

The dopey love interest and his dismissal of Elizabeth's mental state does make sense to me though. From way afar she's kind of a Manic Pixie Dream Girl, and he seems to be the kind of dope that would buy into that nonsense.

Nobody seems to see Elizabeth as a person because she doesn’t know who she is. She was never allowed to form her own personhood. Fred, real/magical or self-actualization aside, does finally get her to start living her own life.

Yrs!!! I even yelled " Get the fuck out of here with that gaslighting bullshit Charlie! "during the first scene of the movie! He was an utter shit. He very clearly had been gaslighting her for the entirety of their relationship, belittles her, and looks down on her.  Honestly I think that the best ending for Elizabeth would have been if she learned that it's ok to be alone and had no boyfriend at the end. If she and Mickey had just been friends. She's very clearly frightened of the idea of being alone and that's why she's stuck with Charles even though she knows he's a piece of shit.  That's also part of why she lets her mother take control of her life . The fear of being alone in life and on her own. Being truly independent.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'm gonna need clarification by Jason on his Clue comments. I've always loved Jason but... he thinks Clue is a bad movie? What? He can't possibly, right? He must be thinking of one of the other ones. 

Jason, you think the 1985 Tim Curry, Madeline Kahn, Christopher Lloyd, Michael McKean, Martin Mull, and Lesley Ann Warren Clue is BAD?!?! 

It is a truly wonderful movie. 

Jason liking this movie, I can live with. but I can't believe he does not like Clue. 

I hope he's thinking of a different Clue. or hasn't seen it in a long time, maybe needs a rewatch. 

This hurts.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, DrGuts1003 said:

Here's a different way to look at this.  Based on the comments they made, June and Jason seem to feel that Lizzie is better off for having Drop Dead Fred return.  But let's run down the state of Lizzie's life by the end of the movie.

She has:

  • No job
  • No car
  • No place to live
  • Lost her best friend (this is not explicitly established, but why would Carrie Fisher want to be friends with her after sinking her home?)
  • No relationship (she doesn't really seem to want to pursue anything romantic with Ron Eldard)
  • Severed ties with her mother

She's not only worse off than she was when the movie began, but she's probably now ill-equipped to deal with the real world as an adult on her own.

I'm not 100% sure Carrie Fisher has cut ties with her because she seemed pretty jazzed by that giant insurance check. She also seems to be dating Mickey which as I've said before seems really unhealthy.  She's meeting his daughter so it looks like they are serious or he's an asshole who just let's any lady he dates meet his kid. So now she's got that relationship to work with too. Plus the fact his daughter has inherited Drop Dead Fred ( furthering my belief that Fred is an individual) so now she's never going to be free of him but the instead of him being on her side he's probably going to see her as the enemy as most children view their parents new partners . She's fucked.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, DrGuts1003 said:

I agree that that would have been a better ending.  But if you're going to do the ending that they go with, then there needed to be more scenes with the daughter throughout the movie.  Show that her mother was similarly awful (hence why Ron Eldard got a divorce from her) and that now that Fred was no longer needed in Lizzie's life he could move on and help this girl instead.

BTW, I don't think this gets brought up in the episode, but the little girl also calls him Drop Dead Fred.  If he was simply a manifestation of Lizzie's mind, then that would be an awfully big coincidence that this little girl would give him the exact same name.

I think that the people who are awful in the new little girls life are her nannies but I agree

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DrGuts1003 said:

I was confused as to whether Lizzie was actually allergic to gladiolas or not.  If you notice, in every instance it is not until Fred points out that she is near the flowers that she starts sneezing.  If I walk into a person's house and they own cats, I will start sneezing automatically.  I don't need the owner to point out the fact that they own a cat for me to start sneezing.

The film had a tendency to drop in a lot of weird things like that they never really had any pay off.  Like the fact that in the one flashback, the headline on the paper states that we just landed on the moon.  Why choose such an iconic moment in history as your headline if it has nothing to do with anything else?  That said, because of that information, that would make Lizzie close to 30 if the adult scenes are to have taken place in 1991.

There's also the weird cop behavior after Lizzie and Fred go on their burglar trip.  They bust down the door of the house rather quickly and then immediately arrest the dad when there is no indication that he is the one who is actually robbing the place.  I briefly thought they were trying to suggest the dad ultimately left his family because he was tired of being the victim of Fred's and/or Lizzie's antics.

The "meet-cute" scene with Lizzie and Ron Eldard also seems to suggest storylines that never come to fruition.  The way the scene is filmed, he sets down his attache/briefcase in the middle of the floor, making me think he wanted her to trip over it and bump into him.  The fact that he inspires Lizzie to discover Fred again and that his daughter has bonded with Fred made me think that he was communicating with or working with Fred in some capacity.  Ron Eldard says that his divorce happened a couple of years ago, so it is never clear why he is at the courthouse on the day he sees Lizzie.  And why was he carrying a document that had a picture of his daughter attached to it?

I assume he was there for a child custody case?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, gigi-tastic said:

Yrs!!! I even yelled " Get the fuck out of here with that gaslighting bullshit Charlie! "during the first scene of the movie! He was an utter shit. He very clearly had been gaslighting her for the entirety of their relationship, belittles her, and looks down on her.  Honestly I think that the best ending for Elizabeth would have been if she learned that it's ok to be alone and had no boyfriend at the end. If she and Mickey had just been friends. She's very clearly frightened of the idea of being alone and that's why she's stuck with Charles even though she knows he's a piece of shit.  That's also part of why she lets her mother take control of her life . The fear of being alone in life and on her own. Being truly independent.

Yep, yep, yep 100%. It is okay to be alone, it is okay to be single. Media does a terrible job of showcasing this.

I don't think I've ever been this passionate about a movie before. 😂

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, theworstbuddhist said:

Love the late Rik Mayall and Phoebe Cates but yeah, no interest in seeing this again. And this episode was really unpleasant to listen to, honestly.

 

6 hours ago, Jesse Carrigan said:

I. Have. Never. In 7 years of listening to this podcast (no big deal) stopped an episode before the end, but I was so exhausted listening to this one that I stopped it over 40 minutes from the end. I may return to hear the audience Q & A on my upcoming vacation, but I need some time to rest, do some self-care, reflect on my life choices, and perhaps ingest some edibles to finish it up. I love you all, and if this is the last episode at least it was...well, I don't know what it was. I'm tired

I understand these sentiments, but oddly found this to be one of my favorite episodes, even if the movie itself was total garbage. Part of what made me enjoy the episode was the genuine disagreement over how to interpret a movie that did (albeit crudely) aspire to be something bigger. My take on this is that June and Jason were arguing in favor of the movie that the filmmakers aspired to make, whereas Casey and Paul were arguing against the movie that existed.

There's something to be said for trying something big and coming up short -- Heaven's Gate and Ishtar have their adherents -- and I will say that these movies make for much more enjoyable HDTGM episodes than the cynical crap that occasionally gets featured. However, at the end of the day, art is what it is. I could spend years of monumental effort and best intentions trying to sculpt like Rodin but I guarantee that it would be nowhere comparable.

Or in other words, this:

7 hours ago, doxrus said:

Team Sanity. I think June and Jason are defending the movie based on its themes, not on the filmmaking. Because they love the themes so much, they're far too forgiving of the film's lousy writing, acting, direction, etc. And they're also giving the screenwriters too much credit for what they perceive the film to be saying. Do they really believe that the writers of HURRICANE HEIST - and not much else - have this much insight into female psychology and gender relations? And when challenged by Paul and Casey on points they can't defend, they just fall back weakly on "It's only a movie."

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

So I'm about to get very personal. I saw myself in this movie.  I've always suffered from mental health issues. I now know I have extreme anxiety, depression and slight OCD . As a child my mom as a single mother and was working a very stressful high profile job as a quality auditor for a blood banking company. She would be gone for a week every other week traveling around the country. When she was home she worked late. I had a really hard time regulating my emotions and dealing with outbursts and fits. Some of it ( most of it)  was my anxiety and some was acting out for attention. My doctors ended up putting me on a bunch of medication that caused me to hallucinate and I had to be detoxed.

I saw my mom in the Mothers frustration and it reminded me of when she was at the end of her rope because I had been sobbing uncontrollably for over an hour because she said " I love you more than the sun, the moon, and the stars " in the wrong order at bed time . I saw myself in Elizabeth making the mud pie in the time that I tried to make my paternal grandmother lemonade before she woke up with the lemons from her backyard by dumping everything in the kitchen together .  I was like 8 I should have known how to make lemonade, and I knew enough to wait for her. It's the only time she's ever yelled at me. 

To me the movie could be viewed as a the story of a person whose on the spectrum, has adhd, really any number of mental illnesses or is neurodivergent.

I don't think that the mother in this movie is evil, I think she doesn't understand how to parent a child who is different . In her mind Elizabeth is deliberately trying to hurt her and be destructive. She sees only malice and is at her wits end. Everything she has tried with her child to get her to "behave"  and be "normal" has failed and she's as unruly as ever.  We also have to look at her parenting through the time period. Elizabeth's childhood takes place in the 60's it's still very much a conservative time where children, especially girls, are supposed to listen to their parents and the idea of kids having agency is ridiculous. Hitting children was considered a normal punishment and no one would bat an eye. In fact people in her neighborhood probably thought her mom wasn't harsh enough. The methods her mother used out of anger and frustration are wrong. She is not a good mother, I'm not saying that.  I'm simply saying that I understand her. 

Just as I understand Elizabeth. I know exactly how it feels to want to destroy everything in your reach because you can and it's the only way to make the adults in your life suffer as much as you are. I'm not sure it's healthy but God do I understand it. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, joel_rosenbaum said:

 

I understand these sentiments, but oddly found this to be one of my favorite episodes, even if the movie itself was total garbage. Part of what made me enjoy the episode was the genuine disagreement over how to interpret a movie that did (albeit crudely) aspire to be something bigger. My take on this is that June and Jason were arguing in favor of the movie that the filmmakers aspired to make, whereas Casey and Paul were arguing against the movie that existed.

Maybe?

My take on it, after a long think, is that June should have followed her instincts and recused herself from doing this episode. Because this is the first time I can think of where she not only actually remembered seeing the movie, she was deeply invested in the movie, probably more than anyone in the theatre and more than anyone involved in making it. She credits it with her sexual awakening and with her career as an actor. That is some high stakes for this kind of a show. To disagree with her, it seemed from her responses, was to insult her and her career. She implied that those who didn't like the film just didn't get it, and were not very observant, and maybe dead inside.

None of this is acceptable as film criticism, or comedy, or rhetoric. She made it too personal for the rest of the cast to work. And I don't mean to pick on June - the same weird dynamic could have arisen from anyone who was deeply invested in a given film, and this week it happened to be her with this movie. I think if nothing else this episode proves that they shouldn't do an episode about a movie that one of them is in, or is so invested in the film that they may as well have been.

Thankfully, this seems like a weird exception in an otherwise enjoyable string of episodes. If the dynamic was like this all the time, I wouldn't listen anymore.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, gigi-tastic said:

So I'm about to get very personal. I saw myself in this movie...

 

::sympathetic internet hug::

I also see myself in this movie, so do some folks on Twitter it appears. Club ADHD, anxiety, depression, and autism spectrum disorder reporting in. My mother was excited to have a daughter and for a while tried to dress me in cute clothes, fix my hair, the pink room with dollies; there were times where my behaviour and other family dynamics obviously frustrated her. Thankfully after a time when she realized I was not that girl at all, she supported me and let me be my own kid. My parents have never had a great relationship, but they're both so off I don't know who else would have either of them if they divorced (and neither are capable of independence). We have always been a very isolated family. My folks wanted me to have friends but never rolled out the welcome wagon to have anyone over. When I wasn't in a bubble of self-involvement I could definitely pick up on their tension and would retreat back into myself. School was great since the teachers loved me, but I never had any long-term friends. Friends either moved away, or I would say or do something wrong and they'd shut me out; one parent flat out told me I was a bad influence on his kids. That's messed up to hear at nine! Never once growing up did I feel normal or confident, and I couldn’t figure out why my life wasn’t what I thought it was supposed to be. I also have a strong logical side but am prone to magical whatifisms that the logical side has to drown out. I know I had at least one imaginary friend but I can't recall for the life of me what they were like. I was the kid playing with myself, talking to myself, tuning out the world. I spent all of my teenage years and twenties studying others and trying to be a different, regular person, to be what other people wanted me to be, and surrounding myself with the wrong people. Only recently have I really been able to be myself and be happy with who I am at my core.

49 minutes ago, gigi-tastic said:

I don't think that the mother in this movie is evil, I think she doesn't understand how to parent a child who is different . In her mind Elizabeth is deliberately trying to hurt her and be destructive. She sees only malice and is at her wits end. Everything she has tried with her child to get her to "behave"  and be "normal" has failed and she's as unruly as ever.  We also have to look at her parenting through the time period. Elizabeth's childhood takes place in the 60's it's still very much a conservative time where children, especially girls, are supposed to listen to their parents and the idea of kids having agency is ridiculous. Hitting children was considered a normal punishment and no one would bat an eye. In fact people in her neighborhood probably thought her mom wasn't harsh enough. The methods her mother used out of anger and frustration are wrong. She is not a good mother, I'm not saying that.  I'm simply saying that I understand her. 

Yeah, I can see that. Honestly, I can see a past where the mother wasn't allowed to be her own person by convention, was pushed into a life she didn't want or wasn't prepared for. She's only working with the tools she has, and they aren't great. I appreciate the moment that the movie lets her be complex and not a cartoony villain.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Rollo Tomasi said:

Yes, there were times during the podcast when I felt like we were being gaslit by June and Jason.  Two co-hosts of a bad movie podcast were acting like they were unfamiliar with the prospect of a movie undermining its own intentions or being internally inconsistent.  I don't doubt that we were supposed to believe that Fred was an extension of Lizzie's psyche, but as Triple Lindy notes above, the movie is constantly undermining that by portraying Fred as a wacky mischief maker with his own rascally agenda coming from some alternate universe of imaginary friends.  (I would guess it was also on their minds to leave enough existential independence for Fred to do a Drop Dead Fred 2.)

IMAO, there are two possible explanations for June and Jason's apologia of the film. One, that they really believed what they were saying, and only dug in their heels in deeper when challenged by Casey and Tall. I can understand an aggressive and passionate defense of FORBIDDEN GAMES or PAN'S LABYRINTH, but this film? It just doesn't deserve the effort.  Or, two, it was all an act, and perhaps as mentioned elsewhere here - all of HDTGM is just an put-on. Really, are we to believe that June has based her entire career on this film? Can we accept that the screenwriters (Davis and Fingleton) and director (de Jong) were somehow able to create the masterpiece that June and Jason describe, when they exhibit nothing even close to it in the rest of their careers?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm mostly team Sanity with a few differing opinions. I have a lot to say so I'll just start at the top:

Fred is real. The only way for the movie to make sense is for Fred to be a separate entity unto himself. It is a nice thought that he is a "Tyler Durden" but he can't be because of the two scenes mentioned (the group of other IFs and the final scene.) The writers may have intended him to be a manifestation of her id, but they failed and/or abandoned that premise and instead created a universe where imaginary friends indeed exist. This is NOT an interpretation. This is what the crappy filmmakers gave us.

There are several places where Fred would have to actually exist, but one that comes to mind is when they are at the psychiatrists office the other IFs tell Fred that if Lizzie takes the green pills that it will kill him. Fred independently learns this information. Yes, we overhear the doctor tell Lizzie's mom  (and clearly see Lizzie not hearing or being a part of this conversation) that the pills will help her, but we don't get the information that the pills will specifically make Fred disappear. Fred gets this information outside of Lizzie... Lizzie who was not even in the room when he has this conversation. Fred is sentient.

It should also be pointed out that Fred recognizes Go To Hell Herman, Namby Pamby etc, even though he's been trapped in a box for 21 years. All the children in that waiting room are under 6 meaning that YES INDEED these Imaginary Friends exist and move on to new kids when their assigned kids grow too old. There is no other way Fred would recognize them as old friends.

 

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

It's simply absurd and obtuse to say that Lizzie is actually laying on her back looking up the skirts of her mom and Annabella. I might... maybe... MAYBE believe she is imagining Fred doing that, but to say that she is actually LITERALLY lying on her back looking up skirts is a serious stretch.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I can agree with June on one thing: Rik Mayall.


I get it, I think he is a sexy MFer. I'm almost the same age as June and I saw this as a kid, but in my mind Fred was played by Yahoo Serious and not Rik Mayall. Seeing this as a grown woman I can see how he's pretty darn sexy. He's also... cleaner... than I remembered? His hair is wild and his clothes are acid green, but he's actually fairly well put together.

So yeah... I get it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Regarding whether Fred is in young Lizzie's mind or an independent entity - Fred does some things that would not have been possible for Lizzie to accomplish. For example, the massive amount of mud Fred dumps on the dining room table. And if we look at young Lizzie's behavior from her mother's point of view - Lizzie is not just acting out or misbehaving, she is seriously disturbed if not completely unbalanced. Yes, her family life isn't the greatest, but it's not as if she's living the life of Sybil or Carrie.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

And She lived Happily Ever After.........How?

Lizzie’s Id, Ego, & Super Ego all found balance and harmony.

”Hold Up? Yeah, ok Fred is her Id, but I didn’t see no Super Ego walking around.”

Oh yes you did. No one else does though. That’s right Janie (the lovely and great Carrie Fisher) ISN’T FUCKING REAL EITHER. BOOM. MIC. DROP. 

 

Ok, I’ll pick it back up for some explanation. When the mother comes to the apartment she all but ignores Janie. Why? Cause she isn’t real. Only Lizzie can see her. Lizzie’s Super Ego has manifested itself into a successful, strong, and independent woman. 

But wait, there’s that meeting at the board room where she excuses herself in front of a room full of people. 

No one looks up or acknowledges her. When she raises her voice and starts hitting the wall? Once again, not even a head in her direction. 

At this point Lizzie’s Id, Fred, sabotages the unhealthy thing in her life. That’s right, Lizzie is also having an affair with an older married man. Hence the “I only have wet dreams” remark to a complete stranger. He was being creepy old perv hitting on his side piece.  In a Tyler Durden maneuver Lizzie pulls a chair out of the office, beats up a fake Id, all while exposing Murray’s affair. 

 

But, what about the boat Condo? Oh, you mean the one Lizzie somehow knew how to start up and start driving? It was hers already. Maybe her Dad left it for her. She uses her id to them destroy the boat that’s a negative aspect in her dirty, double adulterating  life. 

 

That is not Charlie’s car she’s driving at the end of the film. That’s the car she bought with the money she scored for the insurance  money after it sank. 

There you have it. Team Fred. Team Lizzie, Team Janie. 

 

The Mother? Oh yeah super abusive. We first meet her and she’s in a pink blouse with matching pink nail polish. That’s some Type A behavior, but not a red flag. Then BOOM, open the door to Lizzie’s room and everything is Pink. Why? Cause the Mother was so controlling she didn’t even let her daughter decorate her own room, have her own ideas, or any control. 

 

Could Fred and Janie be manifestations of her  idea parents? Your GD Right. 

Id. Ego. Super-MF-Ego. 

 

I’m Out. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post

It is weird watching this (Team Fred) and seeing how it has influences in so many other imaginary friend/manifestation movies and shows over the years since its release, such as Fight Club, Mr. Brooks, Happy, and others, especially considering the reception it's had since its release. This also was one of those films where it was clear they were trying to create another international star a la Paul Hogan, as Rik Mayall is a beloved English comedian, but unfortunately he ended up like Yahoo Serious and was never put in a major American release after this until the first Harry Potter film in which he was cut from the final cut.

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, FallAwayGrams said:

that’s right Janie (the lovely and great Carrie Fisher) ISN’T FUCKING REAL EITHER.

Well... she interacts with Lizzie's mom during one of the first scenes in the movie. Janie says " she just needs a cuddle" or something. The mom acknowledges her and responds.

Murray is clearly in the houseboat waiting to sex-up Janie as well and Murray talks to Janie as they leave for work in the morning about Lizzie... and Lizzie is not present. Also - everyone looks at Janie during her "strangling Fred" moment in the hallway. The entire room comes to the window and Murray personally comes out to ask what the hell Janie is doing.

Just like Fred. Janie is real.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Definitive Support for Paul, Casey and #TeamSanity!!!

1. #TeamFred says Drop Dead Fred (D.D.F.) and all other imaginary friends are the creation of the small child’s imagination. Now DDF was trapped in a jack in the box in the 1970s. If these imaginary friends are supposed to be original creations, then how do they know each other when meeting at the psychologist’s office in the 90s??? DDF was supposedly created 20 years prior by a young Phoebe Cates. If he was imprisoned for 20 years, he shouldn’t know all of these other “co-workers!” So by knowing them already, this supports the idea of a “Monsters Inc.” scenario where they all have a history dating back to the 70s and we’ll before children of the 90s are alive. 

2.  The little girl at the end is introduced right on the heels of Phoebe saying goodbye to DDF. Also we first are hearing of this girl by a babysitter saying she’s had enough of her. This implies the little girl has been a terror for awhile. Finally, the poor, elderly babysitter is ensnared in a trap that definitely took time to set up. So to the sane person, this means DDF has been with this girl while still being with phoebe cates. He has been making this child act out horribly for a while now and thusly... DDF and other imaginary friends are not the creation of the child but part of a larger system of Imaginary Friends. 

 

#TeamSanity

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×