MovieChat Forums > Crossing Over (2009) Discussion > The Australian chick (SPOILERS)

The Australian chick (SPOILERS)

posted 8 years ago by filmcritic-16538
3 replies | jump to latest

Part of that sleazy deal with Liotta's character was partly her fault, Liotta's character was a jerk, but she put herself in that position. The Australian woman (Claire) should have done things the right way from the beginning, she shouldn't have filed for an extension, Claire should have gone back to Australia when her visitors visa ran out, she could still look for work in America even FROM Australia, she just needed to research how to legally work and live in the United States.

Claire was looking for work illegally in America, her plan obviously was to keep filing for an extension while looking for work and when she hits the big time as an actress then she could live there. That's a naive and risky way to go about it, and it did nothing but get her into trouble and banned from America. All of that was for nothing, it would have been better if Claire had been patient and done things legally, then at least she wouldn't be banned from The States.



[–] Lord_Gyaldhart 8 years ago

I find it hard to sympathize with this girl (or the arab girl).

I can understand an immigrant trying to escape their homelands when they are controled by corrupt governments and cartels, when they come from third world nations where famine, war, sexual violence, and lack of opportunities are seen everyday.

But the aussie girl comes from a first world country, in fact one of the countries with the BEST quality of life in the entire planet in all aspects (social, economic, educational, etcetera). The only problem in her country is that it doesn't represent the center or the capital of entertainment and showbusiness (a world she wanted to belong to).

And she ultimately decides to whore her way into the US, not because she was a refugee, or because she was from a terrible country to live in, but mostly due to her ambition, ego and vanity, yet she was hypocritical enough to tell Ray Liotta's character that when she is with him she disconnects herself and then when she returns home, she takes a 1 hour bath to wash off his presence. She should wash off her as well given the extent she was willing to get into just to achieve her ambitious goals.

She was as guilty as the guy, so the sanctimonious attitude was highly hypocritical, and no doubt she would have done the same thing, even if she was legal, if the producer of the TV Show, soap opera, or movie she wanted to be part of offered her the exact same deal.

The GREATEST ally and BEST friend of christianity throughout history is Satan

[–] TornSprocket 8 years ago

The original cut of the film didn't try to make her very sympathetic and she's shown to be way more complicit in the deal with Liotta. Sadly, the distributor (Weinstein Co.) undervalues the intelligence of moviegoers. She also has a reunion with her boyfriend (Jim Sturgess) and he's there when she gets arrested in the end.

[–] Hydracubus (791) 2 years ago

I just wish they'd release that version instead of the version we got :(