MovieChat Forums > Nanny McPhee (2006) Discussion > Who needs fathers?

Who needs fathers?

posted 8 years ago by david-2271
5 replies | jump to latest

I have to admit, I walked out on this movie about half way through for one simple reason: it was anti-father. The movie opens with a single father and his brood of kids. The children are wild and out of control because, the movie suggests, fathers are inadequate for taking care of children.

As a father taking care of children is certainly a recipe for disaster, movie logic demands that a woman be brought in to fix the situation for him. The titular character fits the bill because, well, she's a woman and therefore just has to be a better caretaker than any old man. There are also competing love interests for the man because, again children need a mother: a mere man is inadequate.

Thus Nanny McPhee teaches us a valuable lesson: fathers serve no function in a family except to write checks. Raising children is a woman's job, and men should just stay out of it and not have any pretensions of adequacy. This lesson comes as quite a shock to us fathers who are more actively engaged with our children than their mothers, but this is Hollywood speaking, and when has Hollywood ever steered us wrong?

[–] Illbethereforyou 8 years ago

Its a common trope to have a father or mother not play attention to children and have them taken cared of by a magical nanny.

[–] ctina1973 7 years ago

I disagree. Even if it was a single mother instead of father, assistance would still have been needed to raise all those kids. He was trying to function at a job, raise 7 kids, was still mourning his dead wife, and was dependent on his overbearing aunt. Considering the time frame in which this was set, men didn't raise their own children. Heck, most upper class women didn't either. Nannies were pretty much a requirement if one had any money. This movie was about the family healing, both the kids and the dad.

Yeah, Hollywood does tend to be lazy, but there's really only so many ways to tell a story. At least this has good visuals and was a little different from the norm.

[–] SindyLan 7 years ago

Hollywood speaking, and when has Hollywood ever steered us wrong?

did you walk out on Superman, because that man cannot really fly, it's just Hollywood speaking [for your enjoyment]
you should have stayed till the end because that poor daddy married a very beautiful woman that the children loved.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

He would walk out of Superman because the movie is anti-police and anti-firefighters for they seemingly can't do their job properly and only Superman, an alien from distant planet, can catch badguys and save people.

Thus Superman teaches us a valuable lesson: police and firefighters serve no function in a city except to use up tax money. Catching badguys and saving people are superheroes' job, police and firefighters should just stay out of it and not have any pretensions of adequacy.

[–] Otter (24464) 5 years ago

So it never occurred to you that although some single fathers may be able to cope, this one cannot?

That men are individuals, and not a cohort that all behaves alike?

What an odd mind you have.