MovieChat Forums > The Box (2009) Discussion > A hateful screenplay

A hateful screenplay

posted 14 years ago by Gheelnory
45 replies | jump to latest

****spoilers abound****

Leave aside the messiness of this screenplay--typified by the "comforting" ending with its 'oh, we'll see each other in heaven' emoting, which mixes poorly indeed with the idea that the instrument of this Divine Providence is an entity that thinks nothing of making zombies of people, manipulating events to make people poor and frightened (so they'll be more likely to fail their moral test), and maiming children.

Beyond all that, this screenplay contains some loathsome and revolting messages.

Number one for me: the message that it's better to COMMIT MURDER and to leave a child effectively parentless than for that child to be blind and deaf. As if being blind and deaf were almost literally 'a fate worse than death.'

How delightful for people who are actually blind and deaf to get kicked in the head by the popular culture yet again. How hateful of Kelly to provide them with this kick in the head. (Yes, even blind and deaf people manage to find out what's in movies. They are not inanimate objects. They are people who don't deserve this sort of thoughtless treatment.)

Number two: the "woman is the downfall of mankind" message. Yes, I know that Kelly's defenders (against the charge of misogyny for having all three 'button pushers' shown in the movie be women) cite the line spoken by the police chief. But what is SHOWN is what counts in a movie. I could almost guarantee that if all three button-pushers shown happened to be, say, black---if, say, the movie compared white couples confronted with The Box to black couples---then people would not be so openly defending Kelly.

The 'oh, it's mythic, an evocation of the legends of Adam & Eve and of Pandora, wow, so profound!!1!' excuses would be exposed for what they are, if not for the fact that we're pretty much "okay" with dumping on females in this culture. Again, if it had been a contrast between black and white people (as opposed to between male and female), the bigotry would have been considered inexcusable.

...a somewhat less significant Number Three is the fetishizing of physical deformity. I'd concede that this is merely unpleasant, as opposed to hateful.

But on the whole, this is a nasty screenplay (and movie). It's a shame, as Richard Matheson's original idea is so thought-provoking and interesting.

[–] Wickidforreal 13 years ago

"Number one for me: the message that it's better to COMMIT MURDER and to leave a child effectively parentless than for that child to be blind and deaf. As if being blind and deaf were almost literally 'a fate worse than death.' "

For many, being blind and deaf would indeed be a fate worse than death. A world without sight and sound sounds to me like hell on earth. A child with one parent but full use of their faculties is going to be ok, as children are resilient. A child with two parents but with no way to see or hear that they are loved, or to see or hear anything at all, and condemned to that life forever, is hell and is far worse than the other option.

"Yes, I know that Kelly's defenders (against the charge of misogyny for having all three 'button pushers' shown in the movie be women) cite the line spoken by the police chief. But what is SHOWN is what counts in a movie."

...Yet had there been script lines that were misogynistic, but nothing shown to be misogynistic, that would be fine with you then? As you said, it's all about what is SHOWN?

"...a somewhat less significant Number Three is the fetishizing of physical deformity. I'd concede that this is merely unpleasant, as opposed to hateful."

The physical deformity thing was simply there to show that although she made a mistake and pushed the button, things weren't as simple as that makes her a bad person on its own. She showed a human and compassionate side, as well as showing she had an epiphany, realising her own deformity was not as bad as others' and no longer feeling sorry for herself, instead turning that emotion into love for others.

By the way, I didn't actually like the film and I'm not a fan of the director, etc. I just think it's far more complicated than the black and white way you are presenting things.

[–] jajceboy 13 years ago

I agree with Wickidforreal. Being blind and deaf is a fate worse than death. You might have two parents that love you, but you would never know it, would you? You would never know how much you are loved, heck, you wouldn't know anything. You would just sit there not knowing anything.
A world without sound or sight is absolutely horrible, and I would definitively choose death there.

She did not did it because she thought it was embarrassing, she did it because she knew she couldn't live with the guilt of making him that way. So she did so that her child could have a normal life, at least as normal as possible.

My god, some of you really do over analyse and see everything in black or white.

[–] Autsimtest 13 years ago

If you get your morals from movies then you have bigger problems in your life.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hoboboxerjoe 13 years ago

Wow, currentlyconsidering, you never stop, do you? Literally everything you post is ridiculous black-hate and an ignorant re-shaping of the facts. You truly are pathetic.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] neverteller33 13 years ago

I'm sorry to have to say this, but you are so very wrong.

[–] snes4u 13 years ago

Gheelnory,

Thank you for the input. Although I disagree with you, I will re-watch the film before commenting. I must have a detail mixed up.

[–] im-dck 13 years ago

i think a lot of you are over looking the fact that they would have to live with their guilt was because of their own greed. and to a child to loose his ability to see and hear due to your own greed is a fate worse than living to the parents, which is understandable.

[–] RaxR1991 13 years ago

If you suddenly became deaf and blind, and you knew it would be permanently, I think you too would see it as a fate worse than death. Whats the point of being alive on this planet, in this reality, where everything is about expieriencing life through all of your senses, if some or all of them get taken away? Some people are born without sight or hearing (or smth else), so they cant imagine what they are missing, and they live with what they have, because they are used to it. Some people lose one or few of their senses when they are used to it, and of course, they are gonna see it as a life ending curse. Of course they might get used to it, but it doesnt mean they will ever stop missing the feeling of listening to a beautiful song, witnesing a breathtaking view, the adrenaline of running or dancing, etc. I cant imagine how I could get through life if I turned deaf and blind, I think Id rather kill myself, because for me, those are the two most pleasuring ways to expierience life. Of course, I could eat my self to death, have sex, learn to read braille, etc., but Id be limited to just that, and once more it would remind me of my loss and depress the s@#t out of me.
Have you heard about Johnny Got His Gun? If not, check it out. That might make you think through your argument.

My ratings: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur20655940/ratings

[–] biggusdickus-1 12 years ago

Actually, this question served to point out that the lead characters in this movie were total morons, as they 1) never confirm that their kid is blind/deaf in the first place, 2) have seen that all the box-related tests so far include an element of cruel trickery but nonetheless accept the final blind/deaf-kid-vs-orphaned-kid test at face value, 3) make zero effort to plan how dad might escape if he does go through with the stupid murder, 4) make zero effort to contemplate what criteria the Powerful Space Creeps might use to grade the final test as presented, and 5) find they have accumulated zero insight despite all the random folks who have crashed into their lives in the last 80 minutes with advice.

Throw in the mom's gawd-awful mock-Southern accent -- and hell, I'm ready to hurry up and zap humanity into dust if these 2 are the best we got.

peace
--Big Gus

[–] doctorcrimedog 11 years ago

Yeah, that was pretty much my feeling about the whole ending dilemma. The only part that was even more absurd was the whole "Let's Make a Deal" water portal scenario, which isn't a test of any kind. It's gambling, it's pure luck, and on top of that, the husband never actually did anything wrong. Plus there's the whole bit where the creepy kid gives him the clue earlier in the film, which makes no sense if he's one of Steward's zombies. "I'll give you this test, which isn't a real test, and then I'll cheat on your behalf," so there's no real point. About as much point as judging people's worth based on a test they have no reason to believe is genuine, I suppose.

-There is no such word as "alot."