Oh God, I could talk about this for ages. It's great that there are other people out there who also feel that way! That line always made me laugh, too. I also remember a comment I once read here that Emmett probably only tells Elle that she'll be in the bottom percent of her class just so she'll stick around for Thanksgiving and he won't be lonely.

Soooo funny.
I am not only a huge fan of the movie, I am also a huge fan of Emmett, in both the first and second movies. Hach's statement that he wasn't in the movie enough and didn't do anything to win Elle other than "drive a car" is ridiculous and demonstrates even further her lack of understanding of their relationship, the characters, and the movie itself. It was supposed to be subtle and happen later, after Elle's found her way, or else she would have just relied on a man once more, which is exactly what happens in the musical.
I really want to know why she changed his last name, too. is it because "Richmond" has "rich" in it? Honestly, I wouldn't throw out that explanation; Hach is just that insipid.
Don't get me started either on the decision to make Emmett poor. It didn't contribute that much to the character and all it did was make it seem like a smart, accomplished guy couldn't see any potential in Elle unless he was a misfit just like her. Also, it just made it seem like he wanted to be a lawyer so he could get out of the slums and become rich. Couldn't there have been one person at that school who tried to do well in law school for the sake of law itself, and not just money/ambition/etc? Don't get me wrong, having Elle fall in love with a slightly nerdy, not-so-rich guy might have been a good decision if handled better, but it wasn't.
There's also the question of timeline. We don't know when Emmett and Elle get together in the musical. Is it after the trial? Is it later? Are they even together when she proposes to him?
Jimmy, what are you doing here in the middle of the night? It's almost 9 PM!
Updated On: 7/22/08 at 05:01 PM