I'll never understand why people come on someone else's post to ramble about nonsense completely off topic.
You'll never understand why anyone might disagree with you?
Sorry, but I did and I do.
I WILL agree that Walter was a stupid man - when it comes to your idea of "real love" and his choice for a wife. But all he did was ask her - he didn't force her or even manipulate her with "shallow" romance words or actions. She said "yes" for her own shallow reasons. This I think we both agree on.
But I continue to disagree with your own characterization of his love for her initially or EVER as "shallow." How is it ever "shallow" if he was committed to her - and her alone - in the "love verse" kind of way? Maybe you think he should have accepted her own stupid actions in sleeping with another married man who WAS only using her for his own base needs/desires?
Again, if your own wife acts nothing but "shallow" after years together - how can a man somehow grow "deeper" feelings about her, anyway? Kitty faced the same conundrum with Charlie, as soon as his true shallow definition of "love" became known to her. Or do you think "hot sex" equals deeper love?
Walter merely was what he was and in my own opinion his love for Kitty grew not one whit because he "suddenly" got more interested in her "mind".
I just finished reading the book and there was a great deal difference between this movie and the book. So much so, I guess I need to really treat them as separate works. I had thought the book might provide more insight into this movie but it really doesn't because the script writers/director took it another way.
(E.g. - there WAS no romance/love reconciliation between Kitty and Walter in the book. Walter never touches her again and Kitty thinks often how just "unlovable" Walter is, even after he died. In fact, Kitty is the one unlovable and finally realizes that at the end of the book.)
reply
share