'That's something only ugly people say.'

The OP is wrong.

What's actually said in the movie, is: "That's just something ugly people say".

NO ONE in this movie ever says: "That's something only ugly people say"!

Why do people misquote these things, when it takes only seconds to check it and then you can write it correctly, especially considering their error might be displayed for posterity for DECADES, if not longer?

It's just as easy to get these things right, you know.

Beautiful people have really no reason to say "real beauty is on the inside", because they get so many perks and free rides because of their looks (sometimes without perhaps even realizing it until they hit the wall, especially women).

Actually, handsome men don't really get even close to the amount of perks that even relatively attractive women do. And even ugly women have zillions of choices and freedoms men don't have (regardless of their looks), and again zillions of organizations enforcing the misandristic matriarchy in all its madness, if even one man tries to free himself from the 'masculine role model' or the other social prisons designed for men (even small things, like women can wear cool dresses during summer, but men can't wear shorts or anything similar, let alone dresses in certain workplaces - this is not equality, it's misandry).

Men's looks bear almost no relevance as to how the man is treated by others and the world - his status (his place in the hierarchy between men in a way that's important to certain structures and women), his deeds, his social standing and all that does. Especially wealth and celebrity status. And status can mean things like 'outlaw biker', because women find those incredibly attractive (though ugly) men.

So, whether a man is ugly or good-looking, he is still expected to do everything by himself, make himself into a success. So where 'real beauty' exists, is irrelevant as far as men are concerned, so men have no real reason to ever say that.

Beautiful women live in ivory tower, where champagne and caviar endlessly flows. They can get free ANYTHING (especially in the western world), from a job to a better job, to a trip to another country, dinners, drinks, cars, apartments, you name it. And even in the rare cases they don't necessarily always get everything free, they have an unlimited amount of sex between their legs that they can use to pay for things (and many do). Besides, there's a gender-bias in this matriarchy that favors women, so apartment owners, for example, often want specifically women to live in their apartments. Men draw the shorter stick.

In any case, in such a world, in such a living situation, in such a perk-filled wonder-ride, beautiful women have absolutely NO REASON to even think where 'real beauty' is - all they need to know is 'they are beautiful and the world rewards them plenty for it'.

When the beauty fades, however, and thus the perks disappear (called 'hitting the wall'), the women get a sort of 'reality-shock', and can't accept what is happening to their previously oh-so-comfortable life. Suddenly they are expected to carry themselves, instead of men carrying them, and suddenly they are expected to.. WORK! *gasp*

Now these post-wall women want to still continue their free-riding parasitic lifestyles, but obviously, can't, because no one is giving them free rides anymore. At least not as much. (Women can always get sex, even if they are hideous and repulsive, because there's always some men who are desperate enough).

So we end up in a situation, where the woman doesn't want to accept reality, and what has just happened - and they start living in this denial. But the mirror reveals the harsh and horrible truth - they are now UGLY.

This leads their rationalization hamster to spin the wheel until it comes up with the natural conclusion: They are STILL beautiful, but their previously outward beauty has just gone hiding INSIDE of them. And that's the REAL version of beauty, not the kind that the world still continues rewarding (though SHE was obviously beautiful in a real and true way, when she was part of the free-perks-club - her beauty was never skin deep, it was always real and on the inside!).

How often do you want to see someone's insides, by the way? Is the message here that intestines, lungs, internal organs, muscles mass and the skeleton are somehow more beautiful than the outer looks of a woman?

How could it even be remotely possible, that "real beauty is on the inside?" All beauty that I have EVER seen has always been on the outside.

If someone is a good human being, that's not being 'beautiful', that's a completely different thing! Some may twist this and consider it beautiful to be a good human being (though ugly women pretty much never are, from my experience, so there goes that theory anyway). Sure.

But it's not a given, it's not synonymous, and it's not automatic, so the saying doesn't actually make ANY SENSE.

And looking at things this way, we can come to the conclusion: Yes, it _IS_ just something ugly people (ugly women, really, not ugly men) say, there is no truth to it, and beautiful women never usually say it.

I want to add that beautiful women may ENTERTAIN the thought, because it 'sounds so nice and romantic' (before they have to face the harsh, post-wall reality, so they live in a kidlike dreamworld, where it's fun to entertain pretty much any 'delightful thought' that seems to praise them).

If real beauty is on the inside, then why do women go through so much trouble to try to look beautiful on the outside? How many billions did the cosmetics business make profit last year?

Women lust for outer beauty, but if they can't get it, if they can't have it, then they resort to weak rationalizations, like "well.. but .. REAL beauty is on the inside!".

Really; WHO wants to see the INSIDES of an ugly woman?

Not me.

The movie isn't meant to teach anybody anything. The line is just supposed to be funny, and it is. Don't send kids to Jim Carrey movies for life lessons.