People are mocking you for not getting the obvious content of the letter. And, perhaps, rightfully so.
It was all too painfully obvious in the scene in Iris's Chicago apartment that her son was Roy's when she said, "His father lives in New York". And Roy doesn't pick up on that? Ugh. Did he take too many pitches to the head?
If I were going to make a new cut of the film, I'd want to correct the telling of this subplot to increase its resonance with the audience. We should find out that Roy is the father of Iris's son at the same time Roy does, not an hour earlier in the story. I'd change it like this:
- Delete the scene at the beginning where young Roy and Iris are in the barn and it's obvious they have sex, as she leads him toward the nearest hay pile. Use it as a flashback instead.
- Remove Iris's line in the apartment about the boy's father living in New York.
- Remove Iris's line to the usher regarding the content of the note.
- Roy reads the note in the dugout. Insert the barn scene as a flashback here. Since the Director's Cut already changed the original prologue into a series of small flashbacks, it wouldn't be totally out of place to have a final flashback at the end, to bring things full circle.
It never has to be directly stated that the boy is Roy's son. The audience understands this when they see the final shot of Roy and the boy playing catch back at the farm with Iris looking on.
reply
share