I'm talking about the reason Max wanted to revenge on Sam.
Max was a former client whom Bowden defended fourteen years earlier. Sam buried crucial evidence about the victim which might have lightened Cady's sentence.
This gives Cady a legit reason to revenge unlike in this version in my opinion.
He resented Sam in the original as well
shareMedcross never said Cady didn't resent Bowden in the original. What are you talking about? The OP is saying he/she believes the reason for Cady's revenge makes more sense in the '91 version.
I agree because in the '62 version, justice was properly served. Cady shouldn't be upset at the lawyer for stopping the crime and being responsible for putting him behind bars (even though he is crazy).
Anyway...I understand what the OP means--even if I don't express it properly. However, at least I'm replying to what he/she posted and not some imaginary post.
[deleted]
I think pj misspelled represent meaning that he was his lawyer in the original as well. This is still wrong, but makes a little more sense.
I do agree that the witness angle isn't as good as the lawyer who buried evidence, but I wonder if it only looks bad by comparison. If I had seen the original first, I probably wouldn't have thought it was too flimsy.
Other than that though, I like the original better.
This gives Cady a legit reason to revenge unlike in this version in my opinion.
Yes, Sam buried crucial evidence because he felt no sympathy for a brutal, menacing rapist. De Niro's Max Cady deserved to be put away.
shareAn irony about the original is that while Bowden was a lawyer, that didn't inform his original relationship with Cady at all -- he simply came across Cady "attacking"(um, raping?) a woman in the dark corner of a parking lot and evidently both fought Cady and alerted the police. Bowden could have been in ANY profession -- businessman, teacher, salesman. Bowden was, quite simply , a hero who got "involved." THAT's what made Cady furious -- he got involved.
The remake makes sure to give Cady and Bowden the more direct connection: Bowden represented Cady in a rape-attack trial. Bowden hid exculpatory evidence(the "loose" sexual background of the victim.)
In many ways, director Scorsese and his writers "worsened" our connection with the Bowden family in the remake. Papa hid that evidence and was cheating on his wife; mama had become a neurotic rage-filled cuckolded wife; the daughter was messed up, screaming a lot, and trying to escape her parents (and all too willing to be seduced by Cady a certain distance.) There was a "bad taste" to the Bowdens in the second Cape Fear, and Scorsese seemed to like that. He said something terrible about the Bowdens in the first one: that they were so normal he rooted for CADY.
I like the Bowdens a lot better in the original. I like Bowden's straightforward heroism a lot better in the original. In fact, I like the original better! The only real competition across the ages is Mitchum versus DeNiro as Cady. Its a great role, they are both great, but: advantage Mitchum. I like his sex-charged good ol' boy cool and creepiness better than DeNiro's rather sexless psycho hillbilly act(funny as it is.) And yet DeNiro, and not Mitchum, got an Oscar nom for Cady.
Agreed, more logical and more depth in the 1991 version.
shareI'm not sure why Cady's motivation is LESS logical in the original. He wants revenge on Bowden because his testimony in court put him in prison. Are you saying this has never happened? It has probably happened more often than a ex-convict killing his former lawyer for not properly defending him.
share