I recently watched the 1998 movie, "You’ve Got Mail" again. I first saw it in a theater when it was originally released and I would guess that I’ve seen it several times on cable since then.
It’s not a great movie, but it’s not bad. However, there’s one thing about the movie that bugs me. It’s completely and totally wrong, in a deliciously ironic way.
First, I’ll say a few good things about the movie: The script is pretty good and there are some very funny lines. It stars Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan, both of whom are good actors who can deliver a line in an earnest or poignant way. Their characters are cute and witty, and I’d give it a thumbs up. I’ll explain the big conceptual mistake and I’ll make some philosophical points below.
The Plot
"You’ve Got Mail" has a fairly simple plot. Meg Ryan’s character (Kathleen Kelly) owns a bookstore. Her store goes out of business because it can’t compete with a big bookstore chain that opens across the street (or perhaps around the corner). Tom Hanks’s character (Joe Fox) owns the big bookstore chain.
Meg Ryan meets Tom Hanks and there are some sparks at first, but she’s got a boyfriend and he’s got a girlfriend. Then Meg figures out that Tom Hanks owns the big evil corporate bookstore. She comes to hate him. Because his megastore made her store go out of business.
In the meantime, Meg is writing emails to some guy she met on the internet (or, actually, AOL). Remember, this movie is from the 1990s, when AOL bought Time-Warner and people still used screechy/whiny 1200-baud dial-up modems. Little does she know that Tom Hanks is the man she’s been trading emails with. At the end of the movie, Meg Ryan (Kathleen) and Tom Hanks (Joe) decide to meet in person and Meg is happy that it’s Tom.
So it’s a love story. Boy meets girl but they dislike each other at first. They happen to be secret pen-pals (email buddies) and they eventually get together. Happy ending!
Here’s a scene from "You’ve Got Mail." Meg Ryan thinks she’s meeting her AOL friend. But Tom Hanks (who really is her email friend, but she doesn’t know this yet) shows up.
The Movie Is A Remake
"You’ve Got Mail" is a remake of a really wonderful 1940 movie, "The Shop Around the Corner," which starred James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan. Directed by the brilliant Ernst Lubitsch. If you can rent it or download it, I’d highly recommend it.
Jimmy Stewart and Margaret Sullavan are anonymous pen pals in Budapest, Hungary. And they work at the same store. They don’t get along, but because they’re pen pals, they eventually get together at the end. There’s more, but that’s the short version.
Here’s a scene from that movie. Once again, the man (Jimmy Stewart) has figured out the identity of his pen-pal (Margaret Sullavan), but the woman doesn’t know yet. Jimmy Stewart is going to propose marriage, but she doesn’t know that her pen-pal is really him.
What’s Ironically Wrong With "You’ve Got Mail"
If you watch "You’ve Got Mail," you might get the idea that mom and pop independent bookstores were going out of business because of big chains. Also, from the movie you might get the idea the internet (or AOL) is a cute anonymous way for pen-pals to meet the love of their life.
In reality, twelve years later, it’s the internet that’s killing all bookstores, big and small. Why would you travel to a brick and mortar store – hoping that they might (or might not) have the book you want – when you can go to Amazon.com? You can stay at home in your pajamas and order books from Amazon. And you might even get a discount. That’s assuming that you even read books anymore.
And if you think about it, the internet is killing newspapers and magazines and record stores and record companies, too.
Not that I’m saying it’s a bad thing.
When I was a kid in the 1960s, my family owned an encyclopedia – which was pretty expensive. If I had to write a report about France or the function of the human lungs, I’d look in the encyclopedia (a set of books) and then maybe I’d go to the library (for more books). If I needed to know the meaning of or the pronunciation of a word, I’d check a dictionary (a book). I’d check an atlas (a book) to look at maps of countries. I’d open the thesaurus (a book) for synonyms. I’d read the newspaper or a magazine for current events. Nowadays, if I need to know something, I’ll google it, because I don’t need to own reference books anymore. Almost everything is on the internet. Which is mostly good. I think it’s great that I can look up France or a map or a synonym on the internet.
Let’s talk about music. When I was a teenager, if I wanted the latest album by some band, I’d get on my bike and ride to the record store and buy a 12-inch vinyl platter for five or ten bucks. Later, music was on cassette tapes or CDs, but you were forced to buy a physical item (record, tape, or CD) that contained the music. Nowadays, I just download the songs from iTunes. In my pajamas. I actually like the idea that if I like one song, I don’t have to buy the whole album. On the other hand, sometimes I discovered some great songs when I was forced to buy a whole album or a whole CD -- and I was forced to listen to the songs in order.
I miss the old days before the internet. The employees in record stores and bookstores might recommend a musician or a writer I’d never heard of. I often went to bookstores or record stores just to browse (and sometimes when I was a teenager, I’d look at a Playboy magazine until some employee yelled, "Hey, you have to be 18 to look at those magazines!")
As an adult, when I found the latest issue of "Mother Jones" or "Harper’s" or "Fantasy & Science Fiction" in my mailbox, I would savor every story, knowing that I wouldn’t get another copy of the magazine for a month.
I suppose technology always advances. Things mostly get better. And old people complain about what it was like in the good old days. Maybe I’m turning into an cranky old guy.