the point I think the film was trying to make is that each of these young adults already had their fates spelled out because of the town/situation they lived in - Tom Cruise's character was trying to break the cycle and escape/make something of himself. There is nothing wrong with hard labor, but there is something wrong if you would spend the rest of your life being miserable doing it but had the means to make a positive change. Most of these kids grew up around mill workers and were conditioned to believe that "this is what you do and nothing more." A lot of small town mentalities even look down upon "success" or that you think you're better than them because you aren't keeping the "tradition" going.
Coach and Stephan or whatever their character names are were similar in that they were trying to make a change to better their lives, yet they still had flaws. Coach's flaw was labeling people that didn't fit his mold or those that made mistakes against his judgement. Stephan was just making stupid teenage mistakes, but they both taught each other something. Stephan learned that every choice he made had the potential to affect his life and the lives of others. Coach learned about giving second chances and that absolutism destroys opportunities and relationships. Salvucci felt there was only one way to help his family survive, and from the sounds of it, his brothers/father were criminals as well and did desperate things when the chips were down. Coach felt that football should have been enough to keep him safe and that he already did enough that should have taken care of him. Although not much a coach can do in the legal process, who knows, maybe much like he hung him out to dry because of his mistake during the football game, the coach didn't step up and console him in time of need because he already labeled him a lost cause
No help from Harold
reply
share