The Greatest Love Actually Take Down Ever

Sunday 22 December 2013

Perhaps with the 10th anniversary of the “classic” movie Love Actually upon us, you’ve seen some of the variety of cons and pros and cons about the movie and other general articles about its applicability. And what it’s all about.

But last week i discovered this one on jezebel.com, and I just had to share:
I Rewatched Love Actually and Am Here to Ruin It for All of You by Lindy West

It is priceless, and you should read it — but I also wanted to share it with those who haven’t seen the movie or don’t want to read the full thing. So below, check out some of the awesome amazing quotes that work just as well even if you’ve never seen the movie and (until the end) are completely lacking name/relevant plot points and spoilers. Enjoy!

***
[AAA] falls in “love” with [BBB] at first sight, establishing Love Actually‘s central moral lesson: The less a woman talks, the more lovable she is.
None of the women in this movie fucking talk. All of the men in this movie “win” a woman at the end. This goddamn movie.
***
[XXX] falls instantly in love with [YYY], which is understandable, because she hasn’t yet exceeded her Love Actually attractiveness word quota. (Twenty-seven. The quota is 27 words before you become Emma Thompson and must be destroyed.)
***
LOVE ACTUALLY SEES NO PROBLEM WITH TREATING ITS FEMALE CHARACTERS LIKE GIANT BIPEDAL VAGINAS IN SWEATER VESTS.
***
This is a movie made for women by a man.
***
To be perfectly honest, Liam Neeson is really acting the hell out of this movie.
***
…but she doesn’t know he exists. Probably because he’s been hanging out with the men of Love Actually too much, so he just sits around being a self-pitying douche instead of FUCKING TALKING TO HER LIKE A HUMAN BEING.
***
Hey, idea: Could someone respect a woman for one second in this fucking movie? Or could we at least confine the misogyny to women who are actual characters in the film?
***
This entire movie is just straight white men acting upon women they think they “deserve.” This entire movie is just men doing things.
***
IT NEVER FUCKING MATTERS WHAT WOMEN SAY. THEY LITERALLY JUST TOOK A LINE AWAY FROM A WOMAN AND REPLACED IT WITH A NONSENSE SYLLABLE. SHE COULD HAVE ACTUALLY SAID SOMETHING AND INSTEAD SHE JUST GOES “MEEP MEEP” AND BILLY BOB THORNTON POPS A BONER.
***
Thanks, Love Actually. Thank you for telling a generation of men that their intrusiveness and obsessions are “romantic,” and that women are secretly flattered no matter what their body language says.
***
[XXX] decides he needs to fire [YYY] because she’s 2 tempting 2 believe. Then he has this Actual Conversation with his secretary:
Secretary: “The chubby girl?”
[XXX]: “Would we call her chubby?”
Secretary: “I think there’s a pretty sizable ass there, yes, sir. Huge thighs.”
Can we not refer to a woman who worked her way up to a job in the prime minister’s office as “the chubby girl”? Also, can we fire the entire government for sexual harassment?
***
[QQQ] is still totally stumped about the best way to force [RRR] to love him against her will. I mean, he’s tried everything. He tried staring at her, he tried never ever talking to her, he tried complaining

OH MY GOD, OR YOU COULD JUST GO TALK TO HER.
TALK TO HER.
TALK TO HER.
***
Love Actually puts a lot of stock in the idea that people are either good or bad. People either love or they don’t, reciprocate or they don’t. The grander the gesture, the greater the crime of not reciprocating. LOVE GOOD. NOT-LOVE BAD. It’s a pleasant fantasy, I think, because if you accept the difficult truth that people are more than just good or bad, then you have to question whether or not happiness really exists. Because if people are more complicated, then happiness must be more complicated, and at that point is it really happiness?
Oh, god, why am I bothering. Actually.

—(POSSIBLE) SPOILER ALERTS BELOW–THE REST OF THESE HAVE SOME SEMI-PLOT POINTS YOU MAY WANT TO AVOID IF YOU’VE YET TO SEE THE MOVE–OR MAYBE BY NOW YOU’VE DECIDED NOT TO IF YOU HAVEN’T ALREADY

***
So he abandons Christmas dinner with his loving family and flies back to France. The one expression of genuine love in this movie and [AAA] peaces-out to go hump a stranger.
***
He’s like, “I am here to ask your daughter for her hand in marriage,” and the dad is like, “Say what!?” because he thinks [AAA] means his other daughter, who is fat and gross, and that would obviously makes no sense, because women who are slightly larger than some other women deserve to be alone forever unless they’re the size-6 kind of fake fat like [YYY]. Then the dad offers to pay [AAA] to take fat daughter off his hands. [AAA] is like “Ew, no. I only want to purchase/marry HOT women I’ve never spoken to in my life.”
Once the truth gets sorted out, fat daughter says: “Father is about to sell [BBB] as a slave to this Englishman.”
FIRST SENSIBLE LINE ANYONE’S SAID FOR THIS ENTIRE MOVIE.
***
Oh, also [QQQ] has now chased [RRR] all the way to the airport, where he’s broken through security and is leading TSA agents on a “wacky” chase to the gate.
I feel like this scene would have been way less wacky if that was a brown kid instead of a white one.
***
When they get there, [BBB] looks horrified and is like, “What the fuck are you doing at my work!? I don’t even know you, dude! Get out of here! Oh my god, I’M TRYING TO RUN A RESTAURANT HERE. GO AWAY, YOU CREEPY ENGLISHMAN.”
No. Just kidding. She agrees to fucking marry the guy. Forever. Even though they have never spoken.
***
In a painfully fitting finale, [ZZZ] returns from America with the woman he got. He literally brings her back to England with him like a fucking airport souvenir. But don’t worry, [WWW], HE IMPORTED AN OBJECT WITH NO AGENCY FOR YOU TOO. HERE, PUT YOUR MOUTH ON IT.
That’s love, kids.
Oh, wait. Actually, it’s shit.
***

Advertisements

it’s that time again

Thursday 14 February 2008

No, it’s not Christmas — that was a few months ago. I’m talking about Valentine’s Day. I think I’ve celebrated two V-Days with a “significant other,” but the majority of my 25 years I’ve been lacking a Valentine, which is quite alright, I suppose. I was telling someone that I’ve really not been thinking about it much until the past few days. I saw some nice hearts of chocolate in the grocery story a few days ago, and I remember seeing Valentine’s Day stuff going up about a month ago, but other than that, I think I’ve done a good job staying away from a very “Hallmark Holiday,” if there ever was one.

Well, I’ve done a pretty good job. I tend to run across a lot of personality and relationship tests this time of year, usually brought on by V-Day (OK, so some of them are made for women — but I did reconfirm I’m an INFJ), and I must say I’m a sucker for them. I think it’s the “born romantic” in me or something, I do find the idea of finding “true love” appealing, but as time goes by, I’m coming to believe less and less that this is that one “perfect person” out there for you, but rather there is something to be said for compatibility and attraction and finding out that you love someone with — or because of — their “faults,” and then making a conscious choice to love that person in a commitment to partnership for the rest of your life.

I’ve actually been thinking a lot lately about what I’m looking for in a “romantic companion,” and I’m realizing that as time goes by, the more that gets added to the “list” of what I’m looking for in a mate. I think, though, that it’s more that I have a longer list of specifics that I’d hope to find in a companion which the qualities and ideals I’m “searching for” (though I’m definitely not actively searching) have stayed the same. As a wise sage once told me when we were discussing the purchasing of engagement rings (much longer story in itself), “If you find the right girl, everything else will fall in to place.” At that point it was the idea of getting an engagement ring wouldn’t perpetuate the harming of the environment and violence associated with much jewelry; since then it’s become the idea of whether or not there would be an engagement ring at all.

And another thought regarding whether or not there might actually be someone out there compatible with me I heard in an episode of Sex and the City I saw in December (where they talk of the amazing movie The Way We Were — I need to buy that movie) which I was reminded of again after reading The Katie Girl Project website. At the end of the episode entitled, “Ex and the City,” Carries says: “Maybe some women aren’t meant to be tamed.  Maybe they need to run free until they find someone just as wild to run with.” Now I’m guessing Ellie and maybe other women out there will take some offense to me, as a male, laying claim to these very feminist words, but I feel like as one who will be running wild the rest of my life and need someone (if there is to be someone) who wants to run wild, too. I’m looking for a Partner In Crime (PIC) who will challenge me and intrigue me and make me love things about them I thought I hated.

Will I ever have a PIC?  Perhaps it’s still too early to tell.  I’m not even 26 yet, and as my mom said this past Sunday, I need to stop long enough for anything to happen anyway.  But maybe the point is to just keep on running wild, and if it’s meant to be, it’s meant to be.

Happy Valentine’s Day!

(And on a side note, aside from the romance quizzes so easily found this time of year, there are also plenty of “romance” articles published, and I found this “helpful hints” guide for “8 Surprising Turn-Ons for Men” quite interesting.  From wearing a baseball cap and rolled up boxers to showing a man that you “need” him some of the time, it was quite the article. It appears to have been written by a man, and a sexist man at that. There are over 3,000 comments on the article, which (at least the ones I read) were interesting and entertaining as well. I’d guess my advice would be to be yourself, and if that’s not enough of a turn-on, then too damn bad.)