Day 23 - What Happens In Vegas
First Impressions:
"What Happens in Vegas" in many ways is another formulaic rom-com, except that it incorporates an interesting construct in its plot. If not for the framework of the prisoner's dilemma simmering beneath a medley of pranks, parties, and therapy sessions, this movie would be completely forgettable and a waste of time.
Personal Reflections:
"There are days I want to light [my wife] on fire, but I don't because I love her, and it's illegal."
"What Happens in Vegas" offers a look at the transactional nature of marriage as well as how arranged marriages can be surprisingly functional, if not better than the alternative. Joy and Jack are opposites - she's a detail-oriented trader on the stock exchange floor and he is an immature man-child fired from the carpentry company his father runs. Fueled by alcohol and Vegas, they marry and win $3 million together. When they try to divorce, the judge sentences them to 6 months of marriage and weekly therapy sessions. If they last, they can split the money at the end of the term.
By the end of their six months of 'hard marriage', their therapist (Queen Latifah) declares that individually they have a lot of work but together they work; in fact, they are the real thing! And naturally, they divorce only to re-marry without the smog of financial incentive looming over their relationship.
I've never been married, so I can't comment on whether this is the 'real thing' or not. Logically, this seems misguided - that two defective parts create a more functional whole. I mean, maybe a more apt analogy might be two puzzle pieces, incomplete in meaning unless joined together. But even so, the way the therapist put it was as if these were not regular puzzle pieces individually; these were dysfunctional puzzle pieces, smudged or not quite cut the right way. Even put together these pieces wouldn't form a better picture. I wonder how many couples who shouldn't necessarily be together will watch "What Happens In Vegas" and say, "That's like us! Let's get married!"
Which...might work as well as any other marriage. Because in an arranged marriage (or one motivated by financial gain), the work is more transparent. There are no feelings clouding a partner's deficiencies nor concern for protecting their feelings. In this way, constructive criticism is received and incorporated to effectively 'win'.
What do I mean by 'win'? Well, it follows one of my favourite game theory constructs. If they stay together, they win $3 million. If one of them defects, that is one of them is caught cheating or not contributing to the marriage, then the defective partner gets $0 while the other gets the full $3 million. If they last the 6 months they get $1.5 million each (half). So. In the absence of a pre-nuptial agreement this arrangement resembles marriage and asset-division. The best result, from a financial standpoint, is to co-operate, or stay together.
Marriage, according to this model, is a Nash Equilibrium. This means both parties are equally rewarded when both to defect (which is the logical choice if both parties are trying to optimize their outcome), which means splitting the assets in half. Looking at how many people divorce, 40-50% in the US according to a 2012 report, I would concur that the model is accurate. The smartest players are the ones who co-operate, but it's a very small percentage and takes a lot of hard work. These people are the Noah and Allies of the world. Staying together is the best strategy, and the most challenging.
In "What Happens In Vegas", Joy tells the court she does not want half and gives all the money to Jack. This grand gesture defies the logic of the Nash Equilibrium. Her behaviour tells Jack she doesn't care about the financial gain; she only wants to be with him. This might be the redeeming part of the story; she doesn't exactly kobayashi maru the prisoner's dilemma. She asserts that she is willing to be put in a vulnerable position for something she considers more important than money. Nothing further is discussed as to how the money awarded to Jack might be re-allocated. Do they sign a pre-nup and Jack gets to keep it? Do they share it and make mutual purchases with this account? Do they divide it into separate bank accounts?
"What Happens In Vegas" was written by a woman named Dana Fox! Two in a row!
Rom-Com Tropes:
1. Opposites attract.
2. Uptight woman learns to have fun from man-child boyfriend, and man-child boyfriend learns to be responsible.
Soundtrack:
Two Queen songs and one by Jet. No upbeat pop song to fade us out. The team thought the premise was strong enough that they wouldn't have to rely on gimmicks? Or they ran out of money, having spent it all on getting rights to songs for the many, many montages.
"What Happens in Vegas" in many ways is another formulaic rom-com, except that it incorporates an interesting construct in its plot. If not for the framework of the prisoner's dilemma simmering beneath a medley of pranks, parties, and therapy sessions, this movie would be completely forgettable and a waste of time.
Personal Reflections:
"There are days I want to light [my wife] on fire, but I don't because I love her, and it's illegal."
"What Happens in Vegas" offers a look at the transactional nature of marriage as well as how arranged marriages can be surprisingly functional, if not better than the alternative. Joy and Jack are opposites - she's a detail-oriented trader on the stock exchange floor and he is an immature man-child fired from the carpentry company his father runs. Fueled by alcohol and Vegas, they marry and win $3 million together. When they try to divorce, the judge sentences them to 6 months of marriage and weekly therapy sessions. If they last, they can split the money at the end of the term.
By the end of their six months of 'hard marriage', their therapist (Queen Latifah) declares that individually they have a lot of work but together they work; in fact, they are the real thing! And naturally, they divorce only to re-marry without the smog of financial incentive looming over their relationship.
I've never been married, so I can't comment on whether this is the 'real thing' or not. Logically, this seems misguided - that two defective parts create a more functional whole. I mean, maybe a more apt analogy might be two puzzle pieces, incomplete in meaning unless joined together. But even so, the way the therapist put it was as if these were not regular puzzle pieces individually; these were dysfunctional puzzle pieces, smudged or not quite cut the right way. Even put together these pieces wouldn't form a better picture. I wonder how many couples who shouldn't necessarily be together will watch "What Happens In Vegas" and say, "That's like us! Let's get married!"
Which...might work as well as any other marriage. Because in an arranged marriage (or one motivated by financial gain), the work is more transparent. There are no feelings clouding a partner's deficiencies nor concern for protecting their feelings. In this way, constructive criticism is received and incorporated to effectively 'win'.
What do I mean by 'win'? Well, it follows one of my favourite game theory constructs. If they stay together, they win $3 million. If one of them defects, that is one of them is caught cheating or not contributing to the marriage, then the defective partner gets $0 while the other gets the full $3 million. If they last the 6 months they get $1.5 million each (half). So. In the absence of a pre-nuptial agreement this arrangement resembles marriage and asset-division. The best result, from a financial standpoint, is to co-operate, or stay together.
Marriage, according to this model, is a Nash Equilibrium. This means both parties are equally rewarded when both to defect (which is the logical choice if both parties are trying to optimize their outcome), which means splitting the assets in half. Looking at how many people divorce, 40-50% in the US according to a 2012 report, I would concur that the model is accurate. The smartest players are the ones who co-operate, but it's a very small percentage and takes a lot of hard work. These people are the Noah and Allies of the world. Staying together is the best strategy, and the most challenging.
In "What Happens In Vegas", Joy tells the court she does not want half and gives all the money to Jack. This grand gesture defies the logic of the Nash Equilibrium. Her behaviour tells Jack she doesn't care about the financial gain; she only wants to be with him. This might be the redeeming part of the story; she doesn't exactly kobayashi maru the prisoner's dilemma. She asserts that she is willing to be put in a vulnerable position for something she considers more important than money. Nothing further is discussed as to how the money awarded to Jack might be re-allocated. Do they sign a pre-nup and Jack gets to keep it? Do they share it and make mutual purchases with this account? Do they divide it into separate bank accounts?
"What Happens In Vegas" was written by a woman named Dana Fox! Two in a row!
Rom-Com Tropes:
1. Opposites attract.
2. Uptight woman learns to have fun from man-child boyfriend, and man-child boyfriend learns to be responsible.
Soundtrack:
Two Queen songs and one by Jet. No upbeat pop song to fade us out. The team thought the premise was strong enough that they wouldn't have to rely on gimmicks? Or they ran out of money, having spent it all on getting rights to songs for the many, many montages.
Comments
Post a Comment