....what was he so disturbed about? maybe did his perception change, and now he sees it as a seductive, "trouble-maker" type of smile? (in reference to the last scene, where the dad tells the mom that "there's something about the way she was smiling in that picture").
ALL men are gay; deal with it!!
I'm going with the humanising camp, rather than the evil woman camp, although I totally see that point, especially with the film's title and the lobster story - in fact, this lobster theory is probably what was intended by the script but films sometime work out very differently in the final edit to what was initially intended - sometimes the real meaning is worked out in the process.
A few have said something along the lines of one thing I was about to add:
The smile/happy couple picture could have suggested to Matt for the first time that his son may have CAUSED problems between a once happily married couple whose marriage was still quite saveable before his intrusion - as an older married man, Matt would have been well aware that marriages often hit a rough spot at some point and the right intrusion at that time could end them.
Also, we can reflect that the big deal Ruth made about Richard's smile (in fact he didn't smile, as far as we can tell, unless it happened off screen. Most likely Ruth either imagined it or made it up to motivate Matt) would have been fresh in his mind so the power and meaning of smiles might have been on his mind. There's no way that the screenwriter didn't intend to link the two smiles in some way. To me, the most obvious link would be that both smiles are sinister - Natalie's in keeping with the lobster metaphor - but in the acting and the set design (loving father puts children's pictures on wall) and the editing, I think we get something closer to the humanising camp's view of things.
Great film. A lot of room for interpretations, many of which - even conflicting ones - have solid legitimate grounding.
Very Carveresque, and definitely one to watch again.
Manton
If to stand pat means to resist evil then, yes, neighbour, we wish to stand pat.
The lobster tie-in theory is certainly the most convincing, but I can't believe a mainstream movie would have such a baldly misogynistic message. The worst thing Natalie did was not call the police on Richard, because she felt bad for him. I doubt Richard would have been arrested anyway. To suggest that she's not just culpable for the tragedy but somehow evil or malicious just makes zero sense to me. Absolutely zero sense.
shareThe fathers not only disturbed by the picture, his angst grows when he gets back home and lies in his wifes bed. Hes been questioning his wifes actions and he feels shes responsible for his sons death as he had said during the quarell. He asks himself why he killed richard if it was tomeis character who set him up for the murder, maybe he should have killed her instead. These women fail to admit their responsibility and both richard and the father are victims.
my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings
I'm surprised that you guys think the Natalie picture humanized Richard to Matt. The kids drawings, sure maybe but Matt is annoyed/disgusted/bothered by Natalie being able to smile with a man who killed his son. Matt probably never blamed Natalie like his wife did until he saw that picture. Now he's pissed. It was gradual, he started out nice, concerned, then he took the swing set down, ignored Jason at the dock, then he saw the picture. He's probably thinking, why did she drag my family into her mess and destroy my family. He wouldn't slap her like his wife did but now, he hates her.
shareI coulda sworn when I seen the movie in the theater he said to his wife “it looked like she was laughing at me”
share