I just finished watching "The War of the Roses", and when Barbara and Oliver are on the chandelier, he asks her if this whole time she still loved him and she slightly nodded. Do you think that after everything, there was a tiny part of her that still loved him even after pushing his hand away in the end. How can you be married and have children with someone for that long and not have at least a little feeling still left inside....what do you think?
shareAbsolutely not! She was completely disgusted by him! He made her skin crawl!! She definitely, and without a doubt had no feelings for him what so ever! She wanted him out of her life! The last thing she did was push his hand away from her! She was dying, and probably in a lot of pain, and yet, she managed just about enough strength to move his hand away because he just sickened her to her very core!
share[deleted]
[deleted]
pity bout the kids!
she was a textbook sociopath and never loved him. she didn't know what love was, she was just going through the motions until she couldn't take it anymore.
shareShe wasn't a sociopath, She loved him once, but he never valued her. He exhibited her around like a trophy, he never listened to her, he never complimented her accomplishments, he mocked her ventures, he wanted her life to be entirely devoted to him. Did he thought her love was going to last? No wonder she hated him in the end.
shareI disagree. She was a sociopath. She's one of these unfeeling psychos who wakes up in their 30s or 40s one day and wonders where their life went, and blames their husband for it.
shareNo, she wasn't. You probably had a similar relationship in the past and is reflecting your ex on Barbara. She didn't blame him for anything, she just wanted him out of her life. She didn't even want alimony. Oliver just had to accept she didn't love him anymore.
shareLmao she didn't want alimony but she wanted the massive house that HE paid for? Pull the other leg. If she wanted out then just leave without trying to take what you didn't earn. She didn't even offer to take half, when she doesn't even deserve that.
shareI really like this movie. It's not funny, only depressing unless you take it for what it is. A 'Black Comedy'. None of it is supposed to be taken seriously. If you see it in the light in which it's presented, it's actually pretty amusing. It perfectly satirized the stereotypical aspects of the ugly divorce. Emphasis on 'satirize'.
shareno she didn't care if he died.
shareWhen she runs over the car there is clearly angry there is also a hint of worry on her face that she might of killed him even if it's brief.
shareworrying if you've killed someone isn't the same as still loving them. one could well argue her worry was in going to jail for vehicular manslaughter which she'd worry about regardless, rather than specific worry about HIS potential death. she explicitly states that when she genuinely thought he was dying, she was happy.
shareWe can surmise whatever we project upon it. Her hesitant, not-quite-fully understood gesture and expression to his question as to whether or not she still loved him (as was the not-quite-so-sure death of them both) was a brilliant way to end the film. We are given the opportunity to take away what we wish, want and, hope for, for them as well as ourselves. Brilliant!
Now somewhere in these threads I read where someone was posing the question of who'd you cast in a remake. Why a remake? Most of the time they are unnecessary and insulting all the way around. I pose, if someone feels there is more here left untold, a sequel. Suppose neither of them died there that day, tangled together in that web of a chandelier. What would life be like for the both of them after that? How would, if at all, their feelings towards one another change? The movie, in my opinion, needs neither. But, if one feels differently...isn't a sequel much more refreshing and interesting to explore than a remake?
This film looks and sounds interesting from what i have been reading on this board. I hope to watch it sometime this week and hopefully share my views about it. It somehow reminds me of the movie Mr and Mrs Smith.
Made You Look
Mr and mrs smith is not at all about marriage problems but adventures of two spies who happen to be married and not knowing of each others occupations but war of roses is a dark comedy about jealousy and rage and divorce.
shareI think she did but too much got in the way of their marriage. That's why they reached out to one another and then pulled away fast. The marriage and the fights became more of a game, of me against you and let's see who can win (remember "nah nah nah nah nah nah"). It's sad because they probably could have worked it out and found their love again but ugliness, bitterness, and revenge overpowered their love right down to the end.
shareNo she did not love him. He was a lawyer but too dumb to realize that she meant what she said. All of her actions after the 'heart attack' should have clued him in somewhat
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
she hated him all the way. while they were dying on the floor, he reached out his hand in a final attempt to reconcile. with her dying breath, she pushed threw his hand off and gave him an angry look. she hated him.
"No sense makes sense." - Charlie Manson
That was the whole reason why Gavin tells Homer Simpson the second option. If she had tried to maybe think why she didn't love him and if she really still did, maybe there wouldn't have been a problem. It was keeping it all inside that was a problem.
shareno, this woman was a sociopath. she didnt love him, her disgust towards him begun years before she told him she wouldnt care if he died.
share