[ SECRET POST #5566 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5566 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 42 secrets from Secret Submission Post #797.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

01. https://i.imgur.com/VETuzlh.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

I haven't watched this one recently to compare but I always held a grudge at how short the short haircut was LOL

The lohan version is definitely my childhood one tho and I do think that period of the 90s is the latest you could make/set a movie like this in because it just wouldn't work to have each parent just pick one child and forget about the other one and have those kids just never meet somehow.

[(Anonymous)]

Even some reviews of the 90s version when it was new had the gripe that the movie didn't work as a remake because separating twins and thinking they'd never find out about each other was too unbelievable for a movie set in the "present day" (1998).

[(Anonymous)]

I forget - was there any explanation in the remake why English Lindsay and Californian Lindsay wound up at the same summer camp? It was already a stretch in the 60s version when the kids just lived on opposite coasts of the same country.

[(Anonymous)]

i think the explanation is that the screenwriter had no idea that summer camps aren't a thing in england at all and thought "eh, it was in the original, we'll just bs it"

[(Anonymous)]

Nearly all fiction is based on some sort of extraordinary chance, it is the door fee to media. Stories in which incredible coincidences, or weird chances don't happen, just don't have anywhere to go. It is interesting and worthy of a story because of the incredible thing. The explanation is that the scriptwriter needed the movie to happen.

[(Anonymous)]

I'll always have a soft spot for this version because I remember, as a kid, watching this with my mom and my grandma whenever I spent a Saturday afternoon at her house :). Plus, my mom's talked about how Brian Keith was one of her first big crushes when she was younger, so...yeah :D.

Mind, this version is the only version I've ever properly watched, too. I've only ever caught snippets of the Lohan version at most.

[pantswarrior]

Definitely my preferred version too but I will always remember being completely weirded out when I first saw it, because I was so confused when they were like "...Wait, aren't you sisters?" and I couldn't figure out why they thought they were sisters because to me they didn't look anything alike.

Aaaaand that was how I got an inkling that I was faceblind and only could identify people by their haircuts. That freaking movie. -_-

[(Anonymous)]

I realised I was faceblind when I thought Harrison Ford was a different actor in each of his roles. That Han Solo guy, and the Indiana Jones guy look nothing alike, and that Kimble guy and that Jack Trainer guy is even more different. The better an actor is, the harder it is for me to recognise them. I have to go on haircuts, accents, and body language. If an actor can change even one of those, then I'm baffled.

[pantswarrior]

Yyyyep.

I didn't think about it until you mentioned it but I was sitting here going "have I ever even seen Harrison Ford in anything other than Star Wars?" and just realized you mentioned Indiana Jones and yeah, I've seen that. Oof.

[(Anonymous)]

Ah, I remember getting this movie from Blockbuster a couple of times when I was a kid. It's definitely my favorite version of The Parent Trap.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm always a little thrown when people mention The Parent Trap without specifying a version and it turns out they were talking about the re-make. I guess that just means I'm getting old. (I was born way after the original, but it was what I grew up with on VHS and at the houses of friends whose parents were willing to pay extra for the Disney Channel.)

I remember a couple of years ago reading someone saying "Isn't it crazy that Clueless is 25 years old and The Parent Trap is 22 years old? Doesn't that make you feel old?" and I thought, "Wait, you're old enough that a movie that came out in 1995 being 25 years old makes you feel old but you're young enough that your default version of The Parent Trap is the one that came out in 1998? What the hell age is that??"

[(Anonymous)]

LOL, that is weird.

(But yes, as someone born in the early '80s, knowing both those movies are that old now does indeed make me feel old :p.)

[(Anonymous)]

Someone born in 1989 or 1990, maybe? That's old enough that they could have early memories of seeing Clueless as a young child (especially if they have older siblings who were picking which film to watch on the family TV), but they'd still only be 8 or 9 when The Parent Trap remake came out.

[(Anonymous)]

That was the only version I knew for quite a while until the remake came out, well that and the made-for-TV sequel to the original. And I never really liked either the original or the sequel. I thought the original especially was obnoxious, and I didn’t like the music. The sequel was just bad and boring.

I actually enjoy the remake far more.

Here’s an unnecessary personal anecdote: My grandmother had the DVD of the remake for the great-grandkids to watch, and because she liked it too. And when I asked her about the her thoughts on the original, she didn’t even know there was one. I had one of the ‘duh!’ moments where I remembered that just because a movie predates me by a couple of years, that doesn’t mean that every person older than me knows about it. Especially because the original Parent Trap in the 60s was after the time she would be seeing or hearing about children’s films. My dad and uncles had grown up by then, and she wouldn’t have any grandkids to watch children’s movies with until a little later. (I mean, I still watch certain things made for older kids and teens at my age, but times were different back then, and a lot of adults definitely didn’t seek that kind of thing out).

[(Anonymous)]

You're right and you should say it!

[(Anonymous)]

Eh.

[(Anonymous)]

I always used to get annoyed if this one was playing on TV and they cut out the bits where the girls are practicing being each other for time. At least, I'm assuming it was for time and not for some weird reason like "it's inappropriate to show Hayley Mills bullying herself into biting her nails" or something.

Anyway, for whatever reason, this movie, Candleshoe and The Journey of Nattie Gann were all childhood staples.

[greghousesgf]

there was more than one remake.

[(Anonymous)]

There was? I know there was 3 TV sequels to the 60s version, the second of which was basically “The Parent Trap in a new generation” with a cameo by Hayley Mills(specifically as Susan) as the new main character’s aunt. But I had no idea the 98 version wasn’t the only actual remake. Are you talking about the in the works reboot? Or a movie having more to do with Lottie and Lisa?

[(Anonymous)]

No, you're right. Original movie, bunch of made for TV sequels, '98 remake. Greg just went to imdb or wikipedia and assumed all the sequels were remakes, per usual.

[greghousesgf]

no, I did not. there was a remake with the Olsen Twins.

[(Anonymous)]

depends on how you count the olsen twins version as well tbh

[(Anonymous)]

And technically, shouldn't the 60s The Parent Trap be considered a remake as well? It is based on the German book from the 40s after all and there have been movies in the 50s already.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, Lottie and Lisa have a lot of movies before and after the first Parent Trap.