The Parent Trap

      Over Thanksgiving vacation, I watched and compared two movies--both versions of the movie The Parent Trap (the 1961 version with Hayley Mills and the 1998 version with Lindsay Lohan).  Which one is better?  Was there a need to make a new one when the original was a classic to begin with?  Which do I prefer and recommend?       

 

     

     The first thing I'll say is that the plot of both is identical--as identical as the twins in the story!  Some of the very lines are the exact same, word-for-word (not the whole movie, but many of the lines).  There are some variations, which I'll share later.  The synopsis is (with spoiler alerts), two girls who look exactly alike (only with different hairstyles and clothes) meet at summer camp.  

1961 twins, Sharon and Susan at left; 1998 twins, Annie and Hallie at right

     They discover that they are identical twins, separated at birth when their parents divorced.  Neither parent has ever remarried, and the girls decide to trade places--partly to meet the parent they have missed out on knowing, and partly because they have a hope of getting their parents back together.  The sister who has lived with her father all her life enjoys meeting her mother, but the plot then focuses more on the one who is with the father, because we learn that while daughter was at camp, dad has gotten himself engaged to a gold-digger.  Now, the twin's plans must be expedited in order to break up the wedding!  Their plan succeeds, and their family is back together at the end, with mom and dad reunited.  Both films end with a wedding scene.

 

     A fun fact, both films have a camping segment, and both of them were filmed in the San Bernardino Mountains, where my husband and I lived when we first got married.  The 1961 version was at Big Bear Lake, and the 1998 version is at Lake Gregory--both favorite hangouts of ours when we lived in the area.  

     

     

     In the 1961 version, the twins are beautiful blondes named Sharon and Susan.  Sharon lives with her mother in Boston, while Susan lives with her father in Monterey, California.  Sharon and Susan are 13 years old.  In the 1998 version, the twins are adorable redheads, Annie and Hallie, age 11.  Annie and her mother are British, living in London, while Hallie is the all-American kid from Napa Valley, California with her all-American father.  One thing that is a little problematic right off the bat (both versions) is, how did these girls not know they were twins?  Had they never looked at their own birth certificates?  A birth certificate would clearly state if a child was a single or a multiple.  How long did the parents think they could hide that fact?  Also, with the 1998 one, an even deeper issue is that of citizenship.  In that version, the first scene shows the parents meeting and marrying on an oceanliner.  It is implied they lived in the US after marriage (until mom splits with infant Annie and returns to London).  So would that make Annie a British or American citizen?  Hallie would be more cut-and-dry, since she was born and also raised in the US by an American parent, but Annie's citizenship seems like it would be in question.  How would she go through her life not knowing?  Another problem is, how could any parent be okay with parting with one of their children forever and just being content with one?  It kind of makes me think less of the parents in both versions, but anyway...you're not supposed to think about all that...

     In both versions, the girls meet, and initially have animosity.  In both cases, the California kid (Susan/Hallie) initiates it by being incredibly mean to Sharon/Annie, and Sharon/Annie then seeks revenge, resulting in prank wars that get both in trouble.  It is unrealistic how little supervision the kids are under at camp.  No counselors in the cabins, which allows them to get away with some outrageous pranks.  In the earlier film, when Susan and her friends play a terrible trick on Sharon's cabin and completely mess it up, the girls in the messed-up cabin get in trouble for the mess, even though it is clearly obvious that someone pranked them.  The camp personnel fail to ask any questions or try to get to the bottom of it.  That's where the 1998 version is a little more real to life, because everyone gets in trouble.  And yet in both, there is still so little supervision.  The twins are both ultimately made to room together in the isolation cabin, still with no supervision, and this is where they bond as friends and sisters.  This lack of supervision works in the twins' favor, as they spend the rest of camp learning to "become" each other so they can pull off their plan to trade places and reunite their parents.  Susan/Hallie cuts Sharon/Annie's hair.  In the 1998 version, Hallie also pierces Annie's ears.  I kind of felt Hallie asked a lot of Annie, and maybe, since she had to make Annie cut her hair, maybe Annie should have been able to ask Hallie to remove her earrings and let the holes close, instead of Hallie calling all the shots.  But oh well.  

 

 

          In both movies, the twins are pretty detailed in helping each other get ready for the role of trading places, including memorizing family members and other nuances (such as their different dialects).  In the 1998 version, Hallie has to learn a special handshake Annie and her butler Martin do together.  

     Even though the movies are over 35 years apart, the second film still came out before cell phones and the internet were common, so both have the similarity of the girls making long-distance calls to each other on landlines and payphones.  

 

     The gold digger fiancee in both films is perfectly played--someone you can really hate right along with the girls.  They ultimately use some of their camp pranks on her, and successfully end the relationship.  Interestingly, Joanna Barnes, who played Vicky (1961 fiancee, at left below) played the mother of Meredith (1998 fiancee, pictured at right below).

 

     I'm going to compare/contrast a couple more things before I weigh in on which one I like best, but one thing I'm going to say right now is that what makes the 1998 one more powerful (not necessarily better, but more powerful) is that is starts with the scene of the parents marrying in 1986, then skips forward 11 years and 9 months to the girls at camp.  Then, at the end of the movie, the parents still decide to part ways, but then the father goes after the mother and Annie, even beating them back to London to bring them back.  This was powerful because, earlier, the parents are reliving their break-up, and she comments that he never came after her, and he says regretfully, "I didn't know you wanted me to."  So it shows him undoing his earlier mistake, and redeeming their family.  The 1961 movie doesn't show the original wedding at all, and then, the parents just decide to get back together at the end (still a well-done conversation between them leading up to it, just not as powerful as the 1998 ending).  As I said, both movies end with a wedding scene.  Another fun aspect of the 1998 ending is that the English butler Martin and the housekeeper of Hallie's home, Chessy, end up engaged as well.  They're both really fun and likable characters that the viewer gets to know--I just didn't say much about them so far because they didn't play into much that I was addressing.  They meet in the midst of all of this and have a growing fondness throughout.  

     Smaller variations: in the 1961 film, there is a dance at the camp, where boys from another camp come and dance with the girls, and Susan's prank on Sharon's cabin makes them grounded from it, and Sharon ends up cutting Susan's dress (revealing her underwear!) while she's with a boy, and a huge, awesome fight ensues, complete with food ending up everywhere, and a cake landing on the camp director.  It's glorious!  Since they're younger in the 1998 movie, there isn't a dance.  Just mean pranks that escalate.  In the 1961 version, Sharon has a humorously nagging grandmother and a long-suffering grandfather.  In 1998, Annie only has a grandfather (I mean, she has her mother and butler Martin too, but no grandmother).  In 1961, Susan's housekeeper is named Verbena, and appears to be in her late 50's.  She is likable and humorous.  Chessy in the 1998 version is pretty similar, but a little younger (maybe about 40), and, as I said, they give her a love story with Martin.  In the 1961 film, the parents had a special song that was "their song" whereas in 1998, no particular song is mentioned (though the Nat King Cole song L-O-V-E is featured in the opening scene, at their first wedding).  One thing I didn't like in the 1998 film was that there were several instances where the characters took the Lord's name in vain.  I think one area where the 1961 shines is the scene where the dad discovers his ex-wife is there, while his fiancee, mother-in-law-to-be, and the minister who will marry them are all there.  Ex-wife is wearing his bathrobe, and it is a hilarious scene.  The minister is completely amused and charmed by her, much to fiancee's chagrin.  I think that scene is funnier than the 1998 counterpart (which takes place at a hotel).

     Okay, which one do I like best?  I really do like both, but if I had to pick one, I'd pick 1961--mainly because I grew up seeing that one.  I saw the 1998 version as a senior in high school with some kids I was babysitting.  I still like it, but I didn't grow up seeing it.  I was older than the target age when it came out.  I also like Hayley Mills better than Lindsay Lohan for their ongoing lives and careers, but both were wonderful in their respective versions of The Parent Trap.  I'm not really into remakes, but I think that they can be a vehicle to introduce a forgotten story to a new audience.  

     Whichever version one prefers, I think this movie is appealing to kids because it shows the children taking control of a situation that they couldn't really do in real life, and that is empowering to a young viewer.  The story is inspirational--I mean, what's more inspiring than the healing of a broken family?  I think this movie could be therapeutic. I think it could also be damaging under certain circumstances.  If a child from a broken home is struggling to come to grips with his or her parents' separation, and sees this movie, it could give false hope of restoration.  Nothing is impossible with God, but a story like this isn't likely, especially with kids calling the shots and adults being victims of the kids' plans and schemes.  The healing of a family requires a lot of work from everyone, not just manipulation from the kids.  For myself, it's a fun, enjoyable story.  Which one do you like best, and why?