Menu JTA Search

Which movies failed to live up to the literal meanings of their titles?

SIGN UP FOR THE JTA DAILY BRIEFING

Neither clock nor orange. Discuss.

Today our parent site JTA reported that a woman has filed a lawsuit against the makers of the movie Drive, alleging that it is anti-Semitic.

In her lawsuit, she also complained that there was “very little driving in the motion picture.”

So not only is Drive anti-Semitic– its title is also not a literal representation of what the movie is actually about. Damn you highbrow writers and your metaphors!

While I can’t say for certain if any of the charges leveled against the film and makers are true since I haven’t watched the movie (though it is inevitable that I will since it stars Ryan Gosling), this totally unfrivolous lawsuit has made me wonder — what other films have misled viewers with their non-literal titles?

Here are a few examples:

Clockwork Orange: There were neither clocks nor orange in the film. This sounds like a topic for Coffee Talk with Linda Richman.

The Thin Red Line: I don’t remember seeing the American or Japanese soldiers painting red lines in the sand. That would’ve been a bad idea for camouflage in the jungle.

Winter’s Bone: To my knowledge, no one boned in that movie.

Moneyball:  The ball was not made of greenbacks.

Reservoir Dogs: Who let the dogs out? No one — cause there were no dogs in the film.

Those are just a few examples of movies that have forced us to think beyond the literal meaning of titles. I know that there are many other films out there that have similarly misled audiences. Tell us what they are in the comments!

NEXT STORY