Diapers
-
valleester — 18 years ago(March 20, 2008 09:53 AM)
Well, I guess I have a sort of amusing anecdote for the essay punishment.
I don't remember what it was that I did, but I remember my Mom giving me a good whooping when I was around 7 or 8 or so and I remember thinking as Mom was spanking my derriere red, "Well maybe I would STOP doing _____ if I knew why it was so wrong!"
So, it occurred to me after I found myself yelling at my son for doing something for the umpteenth time, "Maybe he keeps doing _____ because he doesn't know why it's wrong." So, I asked and, sure enough, he had no idea how his behavior was impacting other people. By writing an essay, it gives him a chance to show me why he thinks an unacceptable behavior is acceptable in his eyes, it gives me a chance to explain to him why that behavior hurts other people and it gives us both an opportunity to come up with alternative behaviors that will allow him to do what it is that he wants to do without negatively impacting other people.
Then again, some people think I think too much. Maybe they're right.
Anyway, as to where I've been, I've been hanging out at the High School Reunion MSB here on IMDB and at TVLand.com.
BTW, did you notice that TVLand will be playing 3 Men tomorrow? -
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 20, 2008 10:36 AM)
"I don't remember what it was that I did, but I remember my Mom giving me a good whooping when I was around 7 or 8 or so and I remember thinking as Mom was spanking my derriere red, "Well maybe I would STOP doing _____ if I knew why it was so wrong!"
So, it occurred to me after I found myself yelling at my son for doing something for the umpteenth time, "Maybe he keeps doing _____ because he doesn't know why it's wrong." So, I asked and, sure enough, he had no idea how his behavior was impacting other people. By writing an essay, it gives him a chance to show me why he thinks an unacceptable behavior is acceptable in his eyes, it gives me a chance to explain to him why that behavior hurts other people and it gives us both an opportunity to come up with alternative behaviors that will allow him to do what it is that he wants to do without negatively impacting other people."
You should write a book about that. I'm serious.
"BTW, did you notice that TVLand will be playing 3 Men tomorrow?"
I've noticed. You know, I hate the way everybody keeps bringing up that supposid ghost in the scene with Ted Danson and his mother. That's clearly a cardboard cut-out of Danson in a tuxedo. Amazing how many shortsighted people there are out there. -
valleester — 18 years ago(March 20, 2008 11:18 AM)
"You should write a book about that. I'm serious. "
Well, the sum of what I'd write is pretty much all in that paragraph.
"You know, I hate the way everybody keeps bringing up that supposid ghost in the scene with Ted Danson and his mother. That's clearly a cardboard cut-out of Danson in a tuxedo. Amazing how many shortsighted people there are out there."
I hear you! Why do people have to take something as innocent as a movie about three clueless bachelors learning to care for a baby and turn it into something "spooky"?! It's like they're saying that the movie isn't good enough to stand on its own without the "creepy" element. -
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 20, 2008 11:47 PM)
"Well, the sum of what I'd write is pretty much all in that paragraph."
You could write it as an article and send it to a parenting magazine.
"I hear you! Why do people have to take something as innocent as a movie about three clueless bachelors learning to care for a baby and turn it into something "spooky"?! It's like they're saying that the movie isn't good enough to stand on its own without the "creepy" element."
That's for sure. What's really insane is every other message on this board is regarding that so-called "ghost." One the reasons I started this thread. I titled my post "Diapers" and below wrote "and lot's of'em" really to just see how somebody would respond. -
valleester — 18 years ago(March 21, 2008 06:13 AM)
"You could write it as an article and send it to a parenting magazine."
You're right! I never thought of that. If the parenting magazines didn't want it, I could always Helium it.
"One the reasons I started this thread. I titled my post "Diapers" and below wrote "and lot's of'em" really to just see how somebody would respond."
LOL! One of the reasons that I posted to this thread was that I wanted to 'bump' all of the posts that were non-spooky related so that I could get the 3 Men MSB back on track.
-
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 21, 2008 10:10 AM)
"You're right! I never thought of that. If the parenting magazines didn't want it, I could always Helium it."
Helium it??
"LOL! One of the reasons that I posted to this thread was that I wanted to 'bump' all of the posts that were non-spooky related so that I could get the 3 Men MSB back on track. :)"
Good for you. Although more and more "ghost writers" would just show up. What I can't stand about them is that they deny the obvious. It's clearly a Ted Danson cutout in a tuxedo, but they claim it to be a little boy who was murdered in that building. Even though the apartment was a SET built in a STUDIO. -
valleester — 18 years ago(March 21, 2008 04:38 PM)
"Helium it??"
Yeah! www.helium.com It's a website where people submit articles on various subjects and the author earns money based on the amount of hits it gets. It's another place I've been known to go when I get bored.
"What I can't stand about them is that they deny the obvious. It's clearly a Ted Danson cutout in a tuxedo, but they claim it to be a little boy who was murdered in that building. Even though the apartment was a SET built in a STUDIO"
I know. I actually feel kind of sorry for them. They're spending so much time focusing on the icky stuff that they're missing out on all of the fun this world has to offer. -
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 21, 2008 05:48 PM)
"Yeah! www.helium.com It's a website where people submit articles on various subjects and the author earns money based on the amount of hits it gets. It's another place I've been known to go when I get bored. :)"
So somebody can get paid to post on that site? -
valleester — 18 years ago(March 22, 2008 11:08 AM)
"But anyway, back to the OP. Did you catch 3 Men on TV Land tonight?"
Naw. My satellite box has been giving us a little trouble for the past couple of days and Hubby accidentally knocked the 3 Men DVD into the corner underneath a bunch of stuff. Did you watch it? -
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 22, 2008 03:08 PM)
Yeah. You know, TV versions always omit the scene of Peter buying baby food. I guess it isn't a necessary scene or maybe it's a problem with product placement. Anyway, both scenes of Peter at the market were removed, as was the risque scene of Michael accidentally turning on Dr. Ruth Westheimer.
-
valleester — 18 years ago(March 22, 2008 09:24 PM)
I LOVE the baby food scene. It really does come very close to the overwhelming feeling a new parent has when faced with all the different choices in formula, baby food, diapering, and hygiene. The Dr. Ruth scene wasn't really all that funny, though. Having that scene cut doesn't seem so bad.
But then again, that's not the only scene that I wouldn't mind cutting. I never liked the heroine sub-plot. The men getting used to the baby was entertaining enough. -
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 22, 2008 11:45 PM)
"It really does come very close to the overwhelming feeling a new parent has when faced with all the different choices in formula, baby food, diapering, and hygiene."
And now today there seems to be an even wider range.
"But then again, that's not the only scene that I wouldn't mind cutting."
Like what else?
"I never liked the heroine sub-plot. The men getting used to the baby was entertaining enough."
That's understandable, but I think they added the heroine subplot in order to keep the story moving, to add some sort of emotional drive that really brings out the guys' feelings for the kid and make us the audience worry about them, and care about them. I mean, you could really see the emotion in that scene of Peter running through the apartment looking for Mary. And each time I see the scene of Peter and the two drug dealers as he gets the packages mixed up, I keep wishing he had just given them the little box right then and there and not have to have gone through their apartment being ransacked.
Some people find the drug dealing subplot unnecessary, I sort of half feel that way about it too. I mean just a simple film about three clueless bachelors and a baby sounds cute and enjoyablebut perhaps it would get tiresome and one-sided, and usually adding some bad guys to the mix makes for a great plot twistbut to each his (or her) own. -
valleester — 18 years ago(March 23, 2008 09:48 AM)
"And now today there seems to be an even wider range."
Do not get me started! To add insult to injury, some baby stuff (like most diaper creams and ointments,) are virtually useless. But you've gotta USE the stuff first to discover that!
"That's understandable, but I think they added the heroine subplot in order to keep the story moving, to add some sort of emotional drive that really brings out the guys' feelings for the kid and make us the audience worry about them, and care about them. I mean, you could really see the emotion in that scene of Peter running through the apartment looking for Mary."
I can see them using something to keep the story moving. It would be awful if it went static, but the same thing could have been achieved through the baby coming down with an uncontrollable fever. You have no idea how scary that is. Then, they could have had Peter and Michael run the baby to the ER, where her health would stabilize, but child services would come into play because they're not biological parents. There would still be the element of Peter and Michael being scared of losing the baby and it would be a lot more believable than the whole drug smuggling mess. -
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 23, 2008 10:57 AM)
"I can see them using something to keep the story moving. It would be awful if it went static, but the same thing could have been achieved through the baby coming down with an uncontrollable fever. You have no idea how scary that is. Then, they could have had Peter and Michael run the baby to the ER, where her health would stabilize, but child services would come into play because they're not biological parents. There would still be the element of Peter and Michael being scared of losing the baby and it would be a lot more believable than the whole drug smuggling mess."
Maybe. Perhaps they tried that subplot when writing the script and either it didn't work or maybe they didn't want child services to seem like villains? That or maybe they felt that a plot about guys taking in a baby that isn't theres and the government trying to take it away was maybe considered too cliche or too "Hollywood". But still that's a good idea you had. -
valleester — 18 years ago(March 23, 2008 08:31 PM)
"Perhaps they tried that subplot when writing the script and either it didn't work"
I can see that. Having a baby almost snatched away by child services is a lot more depressing than double crossing bumbling drug smugglers.
"maybe they didn't want child services to seem like villains?"
What do you mean SEEM?
"But still that's a good idea you had. "
Thanks. -
ExplorerDS6789 — 18 years ago(March 23, 2008 11:44 PM)
"I can see that. Having a baby almost snatched away by child services is a lot more depressing than double crossing bumbling drug smugglers."
Totally. See then Peter and Michael, and probably Jack if he came back by then, would have to go to court. It would build up to where everybody, including us the audience, feel the men should get the baby, but the ice-hearted b*stard judge rules against it. They do movies like that all the time. How many movies about babies feature a subplot about drug smuggling? -
valleester — 18 years ago(March 24, 2008 08:16 AM)
"See then Peter and Michael, and probably Jack if he came back by then, would have to go to court. It would build up to where everybody, including us the audience, feel the men should get the baby, but the ice-hearted b*stard judge rules against it."
Actually, in real life, if Jack showed up along with the note that Sylvia left proclaiming the baby to be Jack's, with the way the child custody laws are currently written, the judge would have to allow the baby to stay with Jack pending a DNA test to prove that Jack is the father. Once the DNA test came back positive, the judge would issue a document confirming the baby's paternity, he would then send Jack a custody order to fill out detailing the baby's primary custody and what visitation, if any, the primary custodial parent felt the reponding parent should have and then the judge would set up a new hearing for the custody order, which would give any interested parties (Grandparents, Sylvia,) the chance to contest Jack's custody order. Of course, Sylvia would be facing charges for child abandonment, so it's highly likely that the court system would restrict her time with the baby to supervised visitation on the weekends, holidays and the baby's birthday. Sylvia's parents would have a shot at unsupervised visitation, but the court system currently favors biological parents (I can't tell you how grateful I am for that,) over grandparents so they'd be completely out of luck, where joint custody is concerned.
"They do movies like that all the time."
The only movies like that I can think of are The Next Best Thing and Big Daddy. Were there others?
"How many movies about babies feature a subplot about drug smuggling?"
True. But anyone that has had the misfortune to run into the drug smuggling world knows that what happened in the movie would not happen in real life. In real life, when Peter tried to hand the guys the baby, they would have lost their s.h.!.t. The would tell Peter upfront that they weren't there for the baby, they were there for drugs. When Peter and Michael would have told them that they didn't know what they were talking about, that the only package they'd received was the baby, they would have shot either Peter or Michael and then browbeat the other one until one of them remembered the other package. Then they would have gotten the package, told Peter and Michael that if they went to the cops, they'd wind up dead, they'd leave and Peter and Michael would never have heard from them again.