I recently watched this 1963 Sidney Poitier flick and was surprised to find nothing short of an exposition of Pascal's Wager (though without describing it as such). In the movie, Juan the cafe owner aptly describes the Wager as "insurance." Interesting little nugget in this great story about an "itinerant construction worker on his way to California... [when] he crosses paths with some German nuns, who tell him that God has sent him to build them a church. This cross-cultural comedy reaches its zenith when Poitier teaches the sisters English — with a Southern twist. " (from the Netflix description)

Where to begin... such a bad movie. Lots of bad things, especially the fact that the writer plays three characters, including and old man and an old woman. I've never understood the humor in not having old people play old people, but whatever. I also have issues about to how we're supposed to see the "mad black woman"'s "strength" in physically abusing, including nearly drowning, her husband that is at the time quadriplegic. That takes a whole lot of courage, no?

Anyway, the most disturbing part of all - running throughout the film - is the gross misrepresentation of family law. The whole premise is that her lawyer (and huge jerk of a) husband made her sign a prenuptial agreement, thus is able to kick her out of the house with no place to go, stop paying for her mother's care, and give her no money. Not even her own lawyer (and cousin) tells her that this is not an open and shut case.

Prenuptial agreements of the kind she has aren't worth the paper they're written on. There's every reason to believe that she didn't have any legal representation when entering the agreement, or if she did it was clearly inadequate. Especially with her husband being an attorney, any court would be highly suspect of her waiving all rights to the property. And many states specifically prohibit the designation of who gets to live in the marital home upon separation.

Her husband would be required to help her maintain the quality of life she had become accustomed to over 18 years of marriage, especially considering that she has no skills with which to earn a living beyond entry-level unskilled labor positions. The fact that they were married for 18 years is also of great importance. Good prenuptials frequently escalate the amount of property retained by the poorer spouse based on the length of the marriage. Among other reasons, this is done to increase the probability of the agreement being upheld.

So there are plenty of reasons to dislike Diary of a Mad Black Woman, and especially its depiction of law. Other misrepresentations in movies present a more complex question, such as Dodgeball, a fine flick... until you get to the terrible ending.

Last year (at law school), I noticed that someone's email address rather conspicuously seemed to reference Highlander. Apparently, I was the first person in quite a while to pick up on it and I was promptly reminded that the fact that I could identify the source didn't bode well for my own coolness (as if it were even worth measuring at this point).

Well, apparently, I'm keeping good company in having watched the movies and a fair number of the shows, as Professors Bainbridge and Yin likewise confess to this guilty pleasure.

Since moving to New York City, I started noticing (and am amazed at) just how New York-centric so many movies tend to be. A huge number are set in and constantly reference aspects of life unique to NYC. And characters in some movies even live in apartments at 5th Avenue & 12th Street, directly across 12th street from Cardozo.

Madagascar, however, takes this NYC-centrism — and specifically Manhattan-centrism — to new heights. As Christine Hurt at Conglomerate noted:

Unless your five-year-old lives in the five boroughs and reads the NYT Book Review, this movie may miss its mark.

When I went (10:45 p.m. last night), there were, understandably, no five-year-olds. But there were a number of adults. And lots of laughter. I'm pretty sure kids wouldn't have understood very much of the dialogue, though. And the animals-eating-other-animals scenes would likely be more than a little disturbing to some children.

The best line was very early, when Marty the Zebra (Chris Rock) was deciding what do with the rest of his life, after realizing it was half-way over. Among the options: go to law school.