MovieChat Forums > A Murder of Crows (1999) Discussion > I dont get it... (spoiler)

I dont get it... (spoiler)

posted 15 years ago by BeinMysef
7 replies | jump to latest

Why did the Thurman the rapist in the beginning have his girl friend (the publisher) publish this book and sleep with Cuba... why would he let his girl give up her cooch for whatever reason? and why would he make an appearance later in the movie and burn the book in front of Cuba stating that you will get yours... was it simply for monetary gain or was it him and not Curvus who mailed the book to Dubose. I dont get what Thurmans connection is to all of this past the beginning of the movie... Im wondering if Thurmans motive all along in this was to simply make money off of this book... ( the statement that the publisher gives to reporters and then states she will make a lot of money off of the book )... i must be missing something.

DJ, in Nor Cali

[–] taylorje 15 years ago

I doubt if Thurman had anything to do with the book getting published. His girl friend knew a best-seller when she saw it, and she would have published the book no matter what Thurman said. She was very greedy and self-serving; perhaps not dangerous like Thurman but still a sleazebag. I doubt if she was exclusively Thurman's girlfriend. She cared for whoever had the most money.

Thurman burned the book in front of Lawson just to show him how much he hated him. More than a year had passed since they had seen each other. They had grown up together and may have been friends when they were younger. Lawson was back in New Orleans, having left in disgrace, and showing someone from his past lent an interesting tone.

It was Curvus who mailed the book to Dubose. He wore a disguise at the book-signing and had Lawson autograph it to Dubose. Then he mailed it. Thurman had nothing to do with that. He was already quite rich.

[–] echosixfive 12 years ago

How did she know Thurman? Is it just a huge coincidence that she was the one (out of the five different companies Lawson sent the book to) who ended up publishing the book? I don't get it, some random lady who became his publisher just so happens to be fck buddies with his old enemy Thurman?

----------------
Well hell then, I guess I need my pants.

[–] VickyLB 10 years ago

Yah, I didn't get that either. Seems like a huge plot hole, among others.

[–] Tabbycat (915) 9 months ago

It was.
But why single that out when the entire movie was preposterous.

[–] tabbycat 8 years ago

The reason you feel you are missing something is that ... the movie IS missing something: any connection between Thurman and the rapist, whose only purpose is to set up the plot. He then disappears and is never heard from in the entire third act.

It's a stupid, poorly written, poorly executed hack film.

[–] ficoce 8 years ago

It was a pretty low budget film and had fairly big names - not a lot of effort was put into it.

Might be one of those deals where a studio has a few actors on a multi film contract. They've done a couple movies, but there's nothing in the works to finish the contract and rather than pay them off have them act in something DV and maybe break even. Everyone wins, since the actors are free to take on other projects and the studio can close the books. The movie won't be reviewed too hard, because it's DV and nobody's reputation will get slammed all that hard, (unless this is the kind of movie you specialize in, like Cuba Gooding Jr,lol).

Maybe they were serious about it, but it sure looked unpolished.

[–] tabbycat 8 years ago

Don't why so many think this was a direct-to-video title (other than the obvious lack of quality).
It was actually a full-fledged theatrical release.