is obviously that he was a teen dad when Neil was born. Honestly... look at the two of them side by side. In what universe is Mr. Perry old enough to be Neil's dad? Was the director hoping that, between Neil's boyish charm and Mr. Perry's receding hairline and permanently stern visage, that nobody would notice how close in ages they are? I think I commented on it the first time I saw this when I was in high school.
shareTo me Mr Perry looks to be somewhere around 49-45' and Neil to be around 15-17 so I really don't think it's at all unrealistic, or that they look close in age.
shareI agree. I think he was and looked old enough to be his father. And Perry is certainly not the type to let go of himself. He would not lose control and knock a woman up if he doesn't want it. I think he was the type who is generally afraid of impulses and loss of control.
'Ne cherchez plus mon coeur, les bêtes l'ont mangé.' Baudelaire
Obvious in your opinion. It's only arrogance that presents conjecture as fact.
While characters don't always play their real life age there is absolutely nothing in the movie to suggest that the age gap between Mr Perry and Neil is any less than that between Kurtwood Smith and Robert Sean Leonard which is 26. That is a very believable age gap since back then newly married couples very often began to start a family sooner rather than later.
We have to show the world that not all of us are like him: Henning von Tresckow.
I still like that question and that you perceive it as insecurity. I never perceived it like that.
I am not sure where Perry's insecurity stems from. I was under the impression that he wanted to realize himself through Neil.
Subconciously I was thinking of Col. Fitz from 'American Beauty', but I don't think Perry was gay. I think he was a control freak and an obsessive compulsive personality who completely lacked sense of humor.
The story is set in the 50s, and maybe Perry was supposed to represent the perfect prototype from that era. I mean, this guy most probably served in WW2 which made him tough. And it was in fashion then to sweep 'dark' impulses under the carpet. And I believe he is supposed to represent the narrow-minded 50s patriarch.
'Ne cherchez plus mon coeur, les bêtes l'ont mangé.' Baudelaire
I think that's the case also. In addition, Mr. Perry undoubtedly had youthful dreams that could never be realized because he came from an economically deprived, if not outright poor, family background. He saw this as an injustice; resentment & envy ate away at him. So he was determined to have his own dreams lived out through his son. I'm sure that he consciously saw this & believed it as simply wanting the best for Neil, giving him all the opportunities that he'd never had ... but as a result, he could never see Neil as a person in his own right, but only as an extension of himself.
shareIf I remember correctly Neil's dad wasn't wealthy in the same way the other boys parents are. Mr Perry is working damn hard to give his son that education and start in life. Sure, he is domineering but perhaps he is (misguidedly) trying to give his son some direction in life?
He could have been less dickish about the acting and Neil could have just described it as a hobby to ease his fathers worries about his son ruining his life.
Back in the 50's when this film is set people had kids in their late teens and early 20's so it matches perfectly.
Kurtwood Smith was 46 when the movie was released in 1989 and Robert Sean Leonard was 20. At no point did I ever think they looked similar in age. I think it was just you.
share