MovieChat Forums > Loch Ness (1996) Discussion > what would you have done?

what would you have done?

posted 19 years ago by fredbel6
7 replies | jump to latest

As explained in another forum, when i was thirteen I was forced to watch this movie on a school trip

It lead to the expectable debates about o isn't science bad and stuff in class

So my question, what would you have done?

Okay taking pictures was dangerous as it did endanger the girl.
But I would have shown the pictures, it was for me a battle between truth and cheesyness, and as expected cheesyness won...

Why is it not possible to take a mystery away? The intriguing part of a mystery is trying to solve it, failing, and trying again, that is how people evolve. As soon as we all agree that no matter if we solve something, we still remain quiet about it, THEN you take away mystery, as you make curiousity die out.

The only decent argument was that tourism and other scientist could endanger the animal (the nessie burger..). But seriously, "the drawing of this girl is just as much a proof", I really didn't like that.

I also found that they didn't really let the scientist choose, it was pretty obvious how much they would have hated his guts if he went through with it.

[–] axiomic 18 years ago

I agree. The main character lost integrity with his final decision. The movie is pessimistic about scientific progress. Absolutely flawed - especially when one considers how science has improved life all over the world, let alone saved multiple species from extinction.

Do not show this to children, unless you want to gnaw-away and break any of their dreams that are based on reason.

[–] BoultersCanary 18 years ago

THe film is typical Hollywood. Anti-science, anti-intellectual.

"Woof. In tones of low menace"

[–] x_Captain_Obvious_x 18 years ago

I wouldn't say it was anti-science or anti-intellectual, but it was definitely typical Hollywood sentimental BS! No scientist in his/her right mind would purposely sabotage their own discovery of such monumental proportions for any reason. By doing so for this movies sake the mystery continues for the rest of the world and is supposed to make everyone feel all warm and fuzzy inside because Dempsey gave up fame and fortune for true love and happiness.

I liked the movie for the most part, but the ending was definitely true Hollywood feel good BS!

Moses: The lord Jehovah has given unto you these 15 (drops 1 tablet) Oy, 10! 10 commandments for all to obey!

[–] Towerroad-1 17 years ago

I would have acted almost exactly like the main character of the movie,NOT showing to the world the existence of good ol' Nessie and family...Scientis would have probably killed the creature for "good science"'s sake,so i say:to hell with science!

[–] Starbuc1 15 years ago

He did have the final choice, and that decision was his alone to make. Did he get the arguments why he should not? Of course, but I think there was alot more at stake than just science when he decided NOT to show those pictures.

To solve this mystery would take curiousity to a whole new level. This small community would be over-run with scientists and tourists. A business boom, yet they wanted no part of it. To them this mystery was to forever stay a myth, a local secret kept by a few. These creatures were part of their heritage and they wanted no intrusion by outsiders. No matter how much money there was to be made.

It took our hero awhile to grasp that concept. He failed once before and was for a moment blinded by that fact. His own professional redemption but at what cost? He found something more important in Loch ness than a living "monster." He found a love, a home and a family, perhaps. To go public cost him those things. Which was more important? Professional success or private happiness?

So, he took the high road and happy ending for all. The final few minutes of the film was very symbolic. Him with Laura and her daughter and a red bicycle. Then another family of three swimming in the Loch.

I thought he made the right choice and in the exact same circumstances, I would have done the same.

"Some day men will look back and say I gave birth to the 20th Century...JTR"

[–] runner-15 15 years ago

So it is OK to throw the greatest scientific discovery of the age out the window and ruin your own as well as your boss's career just because it made a few backwoods xenophobic villagers happy? It is thinking like this that kept the world in the dark ages for a thousand years.

[–] rowenad 13 years ago

If the sceientist had discovered the nessie's himself then he had the right to announce the discovery to the world if that was his choice.
But he didn't - the little girl showed him in good faith. It was not his right to expose the nessie's.
I agree with what he did and would have done the same myself and yes to hell with science.