Some differences from the book and movie. There are a lot of different characters in the book and that was confusing. In the book though Ninny is the narrator but Ninny and Idgie (Imogene) are not the same person, but you mentioned that already. Idgie is actually in the end of the book, still alive, living with her brother. There is no sex scene in the book but Ruth and Idgie do kiss, and it is implied that Idgie got it on with a lady of ill repute down by the river. Idgie in the book is more outspoken about her love for Ruth. The major thing that was kept from the book was the bee charmer scene where Idgie gets the honey for Ruth. I was a bit disappointed with the 'degaying' of the film but I guess they tried to make it more marketable but the leading ladies did do a good job with putting a vibe in their interactions I thought. The book, as I mentioned, does have a lot of characters and I got confused with how many there were. Your diagram might be more detailed if read the book beforehand. Its been awhile since I have read it but the segregation issue was more prominant in the novel. Also Ruth dying wasn't a drawn out thing in the book either as it was in  the movie. Ruth was dead before Idgie's trial so it seemed strange to me.  Its just a lot of differences between the two, and I can't really say what is better or worse. I think the film was done really well by cutting down the material to just show the relationship between Idgie and Ruth.

Never met a pearl quite like you that could shimmer and rot at the same time through

I remember watching it with my mom and sister way back when it came out. I didn't read the book previous to the movie and at that time I wasn't really aware of sexuality (I was like 11 or 12 and really not thinking much about it). Through the years I still view this as a good film. I've since read the book (ok I've read it a bunch of times since 'cause it's just a good book!) and I am dissapointed that they didn't include the obvious gay storyline in the book into the movie. Although the book didn't have a sex scene it did show that these two women are together. For instance when Ruth leaves to marry that guy and Idgie throws a fit and declairs that she loves Ruth and can't understand how Ruth can go marry a man. Then when Ruth comes back she talks to Idgie's parents about how she'll never leave Idgie again. I definately wish they would have incorporated those scenes into the movie. With that said I still love the movie. I don't think they totally made it just a friendship. I see the subtext. I guess I just remember viewing it the first time with my mom and sister and enjoying it for what it was. So I guess to me it brings fond memories of watching it with them and plus after reading the book I realize even more the relationship between these two women. The acting was superb! Everyone did a great job. I didn't find it slow at all.

--

http://www.drunkduck.com/Empathy/

I initally was confused as to whether Ninny was Idgie but reading the book it is obvious that Ninny is Idgie's sister-in-law. They definately made that a little confusing in the film.

--

http://www.drunkduck.com/Empathy/

it just doesnt compare with the book.  the movie is definitely more confusing and melodramatic.  there is much more going on with the other characters in the book and the story is told from different point of views skipping back and forth in time and its really funny sometimes where the movie focuses much more on the drama type stuff i guess.

when i first watched the movie i was kinda disappointed, but i thats probably just cuz i've read this book so many times and its one of my all-time favorites so the movie had no chance to live up to it... 

oh and they only bbq-ed the abusive ex-husband cuz they had to get rid of the body not because of some kinda cannibalistic weirdness...  (something like no body -> no murder.  good logic i think...)

in the movie they hinted about the 'accepted segregation'(really there is no such thing)  that was still a strong part of culture back in the day, like the fact that blacks couldn't eat in the cafe they had to eat out back.  A stronger aspect of the Igie/Ruth story was that they didn't try to live with the labels they're given.  They all just more or less accepted each other. Which could be a good excuse for the movie to not put any relationship status expliticly in the movie.  That doesn't mean though that I am any less disapointed that there was not even a shared kiss or dialogue about their relationship in the movie.  It felt like the little gay engine thatjust didn't quite make it up the hill to say "YES, I am a gay engine."

I still liked the movie and the book, the book was a bit better though, but that's usually how I feel about book vs. movie anyways.

My mom loves this movie so I've seen it about  20 times so now I can't stand it because of how many times I've seen it but it is a good movie.I agree with Katie there sould have been a sex scene or even a kissing scene would have done it. I do have a favorit line from the movie its when they'er in the cafe and one of the man is saying something about the coloreds being it the front working and not the back . then after he leves the black ladys says " he won't eat in the same room as a black person but he'll eat eggs shot right out a chicken ass" i love that line.

P.S. hey Katie nice tatoo :)

Kappa Kappa Eat My Pi till I die

"Every person in the world has a purpose for being here—a calling".

I'm just sayin', if you really want to Go Retro, when are you going to review those 3 movies from the 80s?  Inquiring minds want to know (OK, just me)...  :-)

You guys made me remember how great this movie is... now I really want to watch it again!

I hate the fact that they de-gayed the story for theatres, but I kind of like the secrecy of the story. Because Ruth and Idgie seem (to the straight world at large) to just be really good friends, straight people feel okay about watching this movie, which means that my mom showed me the movie and had NO IDEA that Ruth and Idgie were REALLY OBVIOUSLY in love. I was 15 and I had just come out to my friends and I pretty much flipped out in the middle of the movie because I was like "oh my god, they're gay! They're lesbians! They're just like me, except they're successful adults who are in love!" and that really made me feel better about myself because it meant that lesbians could be successful and not have a big deal made out of their lesbianism. You know that if it has been explicitly stated that Idgie and Ruth were gay, there would've had to have been a whole storyline about the people of the town accepting/rejecting their relationship. I'm sick of stories where that's an issue. I get that every day. I want some sort of fantasy world where no one cares if you're gay... and this was one. I think that's actually part of what I love about the story (I also love their fantastic chemistry).

Man... First, I love you guys!

I just loved the review. Very good points. Is a very good movie and everyone loves it. And, of course I loved the re-acting. You all should do more scenes! (without the editing and cutting, of course!)

Love ya!!!!

degaying the movie or not the lesbian subtext was still there, and people still noticed it. adding atleast a kiss scene would have made it fair for the book fans who have waited for so long to get...that.

but overall, the movie was a pleasure to watch, and i would watch it over and over again because i just love epic movies that transdends the simplicity of certain times and places.

thanks for yet another amusing review; you should have a food fight in every episode, just try to make it relevant to the movie you guys are reviewing.

I got the book from the library around mid July and I finally read it this past Thursday and I LOVED IT. As soon as I finished it, I got the movie and watched it. Gotta say, I liked the movie (the “Marys” were great!) but it didn’t compare to the book. The thing that bugged me the most was the fact that in the movie Buddy was in love with Ruth and Ruth loved him too, and basically her bond with Idgie was based on the loved they had for Buddy (or at least that’s what I think the movie was trying to suggest to the audience). Also, Idgie grew up to be so much like Buddy that it kinda suggested that that was the reason Ruth was drawn to her. In the book, Buddy dies and Idgie is devastated and sort of becomes a sad little soul. Four years pass and Ruth comes into town and Ruth becomes the reason why Idgie goes back to being her old self; happy, charming, etc. So really, Ruth never met Buddy. Other than that, I liked the way the movie was made, there little things that bugged me but I just kida looked past them. I also kinda understand why they censored Idgie and Ruth’s relationship, I mean it was the 90s. But I was happy with all the performances, especially with the Marys because their glances and the way they touched each other spoke volumes! It was enough for me to think they were a lesbian couple.

I got a little obsessed with this movie recently and watched it something ridiculous like 50 times in 3 weeks.

As for the Ninny/Idgie thing, I heard that it was originally intended that Idgie and Ninny would be the same person, but then they bought Flagg in and she added the stuff at the beginning to make it clear they weren't, but the end was left the same so you still have this ambiguous ending and a few other scenes which suggest they are maybe the same person.

Loved your review ladies! I agree 100% about the cannibalism scene and the train tracks situation! LOL. I kept thinking....WHY didn't Buddy just throw himself to the side of the tracks and break his leg as opposed to basically killing himself.  Who knows? 

I think I would give it a 4.0 only because I LOVE drama's and I really fell in love with the characters.  It's a good thing I was not there because whenever I watch the darn movie I ball my eyes out and try to play it off like my eyes are just watering....LOL.

P.S. What exactly were you using for the food fight? Icecream? I was just trying to figure out what exactly was on Danielle's shirt.

wasn't entirely written by Fannie Flagg - she wasn't the one who tried to take out the lesbianism. And I do think that the balance between straight and gay was pretty decent - as lesbians, we get the lesbian relationship but yet the straight people see them as friends. In terms of it being palatable to a wider audience, I pretty much understand. While I really do wish they'd made the lesbian thing more obvious, I get the decision.

The book is certainly much better than the movie, despite my undying love for Mary Stuart Masterson (she played my favourite character of all time, Watts the most lesbianish non-lesbian that ever lived! She had vests, fingerless gloves, white singlets, denim cut-offs, half-bleached short hair, a permanent sneer and played the drums!). It goes much deeper into the relationship, deals with a lot more issues, and makes everything a lot more understandable and believable. And the best part about it is that the town totally accepts their lesbian relationship as if it's normal! Even while racial segregation is running rampant!

And - will Caroline be coming back any time soon? :)

I love this movie! I love everything about it. And it's definitely one of my favorites of all time even though the lesbian stuff was done in subtext. I actually like it like that to be quite honest and it made it feel like watching an old movie that couldn't show a sex scene. Loads of implied stuff, subtext and making the viewer work for it, imagine it themselves. I really liked that. Would I have liked to seen then go at it? Sure, but it wasn't necessary to convey the deep feelings these two had for each other.

The movie itself is just so perfect. I love the melodrama of it, the characters and acting is amazing... and I rarely cry while watching movies but I friggin' cry every time I see this. Every.single.time. 

The chemistry between Ruth and Idgie... or should I say Mary Stuart Masterson and Mary Louise Parker is one of the best in any movie I've ever seen. Amazing!

I love the way the story flows, so effortlessly and even though it's a long movie, a bit of a slow burn, I've never turned to see what time it is when I watch it and I've seen this movie at least a couple of dozen times. But then again, I love slow paced movies.

Truthfully, I really didn't have as much trouble with the subtext as many seem to have. Maybe it's because I've never read the book or never heard of it before seeing the movie so it's not like I was missing something... I still think the movie works really well the way it is and there's not much I want to change, and that includes any sex scenes.

Thanks for reviewing this, it was great hearing what you guys thought of one of my all time favorite movies. 

I have to admit sometimes when we do the vlog, at least for me, I find that my mouth races quicker than my mind, so on occasion yes I find myself paraphrasing quotes rather than saying exactly what was said in the movie. I get so excited about talking about the movie that I don't get it exactly right.. but I'm assuming that our audience can pick up on what scene we are talking about or correct us when we are wrong and perhaps being understanding. We really do appreciate the corrections because gosh knows we want to always learn more. The reality is we don't have a teleprompter or producers working behind the scenes. It's interesting because in television there are so many people behind the scenes to make sure the anchors or reporters get their information right but here it's just us. That's what makes vlogs so interesting because it's sort of like reality television or live television without the huge crew and sometimes you find yourself saying something and thinking.. "whoops" did I actually say that.

I guess with this film I did find that because none of us had read the book we were at a slight disadvantage. Yet, I guess it's also interesting to rate this film independantly from the book. I'm sure if we had read the book we would feel differently about the movie, but we are hoping people will let us know as much as they can about the book and how they felt it compared to the movie. Also, perhaps they can answer our questions. I'm still really curious to know who Mrs. Otis is?

Thanks so much for the comments. You guys rock!

Rina

Whenever I'm asked to name my favorite romantic movie, I always say, "Fried Green Tomatoes."  While a gratuitous make out scene would have been nice, it really wasn't necessary to convey the love these two women shared.  I also loved the film for its ability to tackle difficult issues like racism, aging and sexism.

That being said, your food fight was great and it ended the way all good food fights should end:  hot girl-on-girl action.  :-)   Sadly, I spent most of your scene thinking, "I can't believe they're throwing water and food and they don't have anything covering the hard wood floors."

I give Fried Green Tomatoes a 4.65.

I agree with several other people, the film was a mainstream big budget Hollywood film of the early 90's and as such was about as 'gay' as it was ever going to be! I believe that even if you have never heard of the book or know anything about the story, the subtext is there if you are used to having to look for it, (which lets face it, we are).

I love this film and have seen it more times than I care to remember. The book is also a favourite of mine, and is better, but then books usually are. I actually watched this with my Mum last week in readiment. I'm not out to her, and just asked if she fancied watching something with me. All the way through it I was thinking she has to get it, she has to see that this is a love story.. but, she didn't, at all. All she did say was that it had been years since she last saw it, and had forgotten how good it was. She also said that she thought my step-dad would like to see it again..!! It just goes to show that if you are a gay audience, and as I said, are used to living on scraps, you watch a film completely differently to a straight audience. The subtext is there, and is meant to be, without a doubt, but if you are used to taking a film on face value because every film represents you, then what you see is ALL you get.

Was waiting for you to review this- first saw this with my dad when it came out (and I was just realising that I should!!). Seen it many times since and still love it. I like the book too, but if you found it hard following all the people in the movie then you'd need a MUCH bigger chart to follow all the characters in the book!!!

Both the Marys and FF have both said that they were upset that the relationship of itchy ;-) and Ruth wasn't explored  as regards the gayness, but at least they managed the subtext, which for 1991 was pretty good.

Keep up the reviewing.... it's got me watching films that I probably wouldn't have otherwise (tho it is a bit difficult to find some of them.....any tips for non US viewers?)

PS regarding your credit/theme music, keep humming it for ages after watching your vlogs... is it anything in particular? 

There's a point in the book where Idgie's so depressed at Ruth being gone, to be married to Frank Bennett, that she spends a lot of time in that icky bar.  The bar owner, can't remember her name, feels so sorry for Idgie that she has sex with her to cheer her up.  I'm guessing if Idgie had sex with that woman, then Idgie and Ruth definitely had sex in the book.  It just wasn't mentioned.

There's also a moment in the book, later on in their relationship that Ruth gets jealous of Idgie hanging out in that icky bar - and I'm sure Ruth is very aware of Idgie's carnal knowledge of the bar owner - that Idgie and Ruth have a huge fight and Ruth moves out of the house.  Idgie compares the fights her and Ruth have to that of the fights Grady has with his wife.  Idgie and Ruth are basically a married couple - a married couple that the whole town of Whistlestop are cool with.  The bar owner reasons with Idgie that Ruth gave up so many things to be with Idgie, that Idgie should stop being a fool.

Its really a great book.  When I reread it, I mostly just read the Idgie and Ruth parts. 

I just wanted to say that i just watched all your reviewings and it was fun! LOL ...

i have a movie suggestion: bound!

I forgot how much I love that movie, thanks for reminding me.  :)

I'll have to see if I can find the book.

Awww, this book and movie make me very nostalgic. I read the book when I was only a little little baby lesbian. At the time it was the most lesbian thing I'd ever read besides the Color Purple which I hijacked from my school library.

I remember reading the passage where Idgie takes Ruth to get the honey over and over again. It made me go all tingley! To think how many lesbian stories I've read since then. I'm so glad I'm growing up in this time.

When I realised a film of the book was available I had my ma buy it and she even watched it with me, I'm so glad it wasn't too overt, at the time I probably would have gone beet red and had the ground swallow me.

As it was my mum adored the movie, laughing heartly at Evelyns revenges and me, well I recognised the meaning behind "Best friend I ever had...and I love her" Gasp! and "I'm as settled as I ever hope to be." and coupled with what I secretly knew from the book, made this one of my all-time favourites.

 Quotes I still use to this day:

"You have a negetive sense of direction"

"If I was gonna kill you, I'd of used my hands"

"Don't you ever say never to me"

"Gumped up, baboon face bee starred!"

 "Your just a bee charmer Idgie Threadgoode, that;s what you are" (Granted, not easily slotted into every day conversation...)

I want to defend the choice of creating a movie full of subtext but never really going there. I went to see this movie with a group of friends in college, all girls, no one was out. . . yet. I remember the reaction to the fact that they kissed as shocking or because it happened so quick, you thought, what was that. No one else saw the obvious relationship that I saw. They were comfortable with the idea of a close friendship.

Finally, I believe that the melodrama keeps the viewer off balance and constantly rooting for this couple to succeed, without giving you time to realize you are being pulled into a relationship that culturally you thought you objected to. Yet, there it is.

This movie has to be judged for the time it was made.

  I really liked this movie. It’s sweet. I watched some years ago when I was 16, I guess. It was pretty funny cause my mom and granny said I should watch so I did it. By the end of the movie mom went “isn’t it sweet how real friendship is…” Me: “yeah mom, it is…” In my head: “wtf mom, how can’t you get it? They’re freaking lovers!!!”

Anyways, I think it’s good, though I really wanted, as Katie, some action!!

Uhhhhh you guys should do sarah waters!! I love fingersmith!!!

Question: they  always say our generation in the vlog right? How old are they?

I loved the movie so much, I bought the book. And loved it even more. What struck me the most after reading it was that Fannie Flagg had told a very sweet story set in the very conservative Bible belt South and touched on almost every biblical taboo there is such as, homosexuality, prostitution, alcoholism, racism, cannibalism, wife-beating, adultery, euthanasia, gambling, divorce, and murder. Then she also brings up sensitive topics like handicaps, Alzheimer's, the KKK, the Southern Good Ol' Boy network, hobos, and really the list goes on. It's brilliant that one story can blow all of these issues out of the water and leave you liking all the characters (except that a** Frank). The thing is, if you aren't looking for those issues in this book, you probably won't see them. It's that well done.