Posted on 12/13/2025 6:11:45 PM PST by DoodleBob
Before leaving the Christmas Movie Or Not debate, I wanted to weigh in on whether the theme of Trading Places remains relevant. Upon reflection, this movie has MORE to say about America in 2025 vs 1983.
To recap…
Holding opposing views on the issue of nature versus nurture, the Dukes make a wager and agree to conduct an experiment. The winner gets $1. The movie gives us a Birds Eye video of the results of switching the lives of Valentine and Winthorpe, two people in contrasting social strata.
Later, the Dukes discuss their experiment and settle their wager for $1. They plot to return Valentine to the streets, but have no intention of taking back Winthorpe.
Valentine overhears the conversation and seeks out Winthorpe, who has attempted suicide by overdosing. They go from foes to teammates, and ultimately defeat the Dukes, rendering them ruined while the former lab rats live happily ever after.
Now, I understand the hesitancy to see Trading Places as a good proxy for Today. I also understand some people feel TP is an early Hollywood reverse discrimination attempt. It’s so easy to see any movie as propaganda. Hollywood is not a friend of truth, morality, and America.
But taken as a whole, this movie from 1983 isn’t some woke piece of junk.
- Dan Ackroyd appears in black face,
- Jamie Lee Curtis’s is topless.
-Valentine took some of the planted drugs and was smoking them in the bathroom - https://youtu.be/wjkdynBFHuQ - brainwashers would strike that scene.
In fact, revisionist wokesters online dislike TP. One loser calls it “racist, sexist, classist and intensely bourgeoisie and capitalist. Also, unfunny.” One other website wokily rambles: “Trading Places” includes racist and sexist stereotypes that were unacceptable then and now, though many of the characters’ prejudices, including the use of slurs, reinforce the film’s satire. Same goes for the scenes with Jamie Lee Curtis, which include gratuitous nudity. Her character, Ophelia, is a sex worker who has both a clichéd “heart of gold” and an incredible mind for business that she uses to save up for an early retirement. Other scenes, like one featuring Aykroyd in blackface, are impossible to defend.“
If leftists today hate Trading Places, that must mean it’s a great movie. That’s because it IS.
In reality, this is a story of us vs them, Deplorables vs Elites, good (but not perfect) vs evil, and the ants vs jar-shakers. It stands the test of time.
In fact, in 2025, Mortimer and Randolph Duke have more in common with your average leftist and DNC donor than Our Side. Meanwhile, Winthrop and Valentine could very well have BOTH voted for Trump, and may even be FReepers.
Peace out.
Isn’t that the one where a homeless black guy outsmarts all the white people?
No, because Dan Ackroyd was the mastermind.
Gremlins is also a Christmas movie.
Possibly the darkest of all the Christmas movies.
I saw it recently, for the first time since the Reagan Admin. It’s pretty brutal.
“If leftists today hate Trading Places, that must mean it’s a great movie. “
Works for me.
That would be one way to get me into a theater, advertise the liberal’s hate for the movie.
Decades ago, I heard second hand how outraged libs were at “Heartbreak Ridge”
I was mystified and still am a bit.
“My life savings, sir. Try not to lose it.”
I far prefer “Trading Places” as a Christmas movie, and an all around great movie.
I just enjoy the semi-outraged discussions about the suitability of “Die Hard” as a Christmas movie.
I very much enjoyed your analysis and agree with it!
Well said, sir!
Yes and yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.