MovieChat Forums > Revolutionary Road (2009) Discussion > Was there even a point in this film?

Was there even a point in this film?

posted 13 years ago by lumosnight
28 replies | jump to latest

All this film was consisted of were arguments and arguments between petty people. Most of us have more serious things to handle in life and in this movie we are insulted by a lot of shouting about some stupid little things. You don't connect with any of the characters at all.
There was a lot of pretentiousness in the film, such as when the guy who was deemed insane wisely proclaims how intelligent April is and then he too starts ranting over useless things.

And as if the writers did not know how to end it, they just kill off April. The end.

I was dragged into cinema to watch this film (when I wanted to see Slumdog Millionaire at the time) and I felt that I was in the middle of a two hour argument between two stupid people. Honestly how can anyone sympathise with these characters is beyond understanding.

[–] Loomis_Orange 13 years ago

Have you read the book? The book is Flawless. Richard Yates takes us into the lives of these people individually. We learn about Mrs Givings and her obsessions and we learn much more about Shep and his wife and their individual backgrounds. A movie cannot go into detail like a book can. The movie is remote. The book is NOT remote. We all know people like this. Our parents and grandparents are these people.. Have you read the book and if you have..what do you think about the book?

This film can only be appreciated if you read the book first!

Accept Loss ~ Jack Kerouac

[–] tbradydvm 13 years ago

That's not really true. I watched the film before reading the book and I still enjoyed it. However, I can see how it wouldn't be for everyone.

The point of the movie, as I saw it, was to watch a marriage unravel as the two people involved are forced to finally let go of their youthful dreams and delusions and discover that they are not suited for each other or their life together. It's sad, but riveting. Reading the book adds a lot of depth, looking back.

[–] Loomis_Orange 13 years ago

But I can give you a list of about 100 things that the book tells us that the movie doesn't. Do you want me to go into detail? Maureen, Franks mistress, for instance.. just one little piece. the obsession Mrs. Givings has with buying old houses and detailed how she fixed them up. I would have enjoyed more detail on John Givings, in fact. I would have enjoyed the entire film to focus on him. Michael Shannon is a genius actor. Rich, Rich, Rich actor with So Much to give.

Accept Loss ~ Jack Kerouac

[–] The-ManWithNoName 12 years ago

It's called real life. It's not always a happy ending, in fact most relationships (67%)end badly. It's just a story of two people who settled for what they had to work with. If you want a predictable love story watch a chick flick. This was neo realism in a modern American setting. Asking a stupid question like was there a point? Is like me asking if there's a point to your existence. It's called life experience and it's not always pleasant.

You're not a writer Fink, you're a goddamn write off

[–] koffeenkreame41-1 12 years ago

^^Completely agree. Not all couples ride off into the sunset. Sometimes they end up completely broken & empty inside.

"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit' me!" Hudson in Aliens.

[–] KingCobra686 9 years ago

This was neo realism in a modern American setting.

Well it was a 1950's setting, not a modern one...

But otherwise I agree.

[–] rabbyx7 12 years ago

I know that this movie is not everyone's cup of tea but still, what a stupid question to ask...

Perfection Doesn't Exist, But You Have to Look For It Anyway

[–] PotassiumMan 11 years ago

I think what the OP is getting at is that there's not enough of an emotional connection with either of the two principals. There were times when I felt sorry for Leonardo DiCaprio, but the film overall left me wanting more. Despite the compelling performances, I found myself detached throughout.

[–] IcingOnTheCake 10 years ago

I was more into it the second time I saw it. Maybe it, the first viewing, was having seen the actors together in something else and watching every little thing else that went on around them in the film instead of just them.
It's better the second time around, there's a thread on that, and I saw more then between their characters.

[–] sunchick116-872-583383 9 years ago

i agree with this. i think what viewers want in a film is to at least empathize with characters. i couldn't stand april at all. was there a point to this film? yes. not all relationships are perfect or end hapily but we know that already. there are other ways to show that. ironically, in 'titanic' the two main characters don't end up together either because one of them dies again, but we still love that movie because we love the story IN THE MEANTIME. there's nothing enjoyable about getting to the end of this film, except that it's over. it's painful to sit through.

[–] frogca 8 years ago

I think what the OP is getting at is that there's not enough of an emotional connection with either of the two principals. . . . Despite the compelling performances, I found myself detached throughout.

The emotional connection has to come fro the viewer. Lucky you that you couldn't relate to these two. Unfortunately, I could in spades. I didn't need to see this kind of pain, as I've lived it, but I was riveted... given that, hey, there's my story up in lights. As I say, lucky you that you couldn't relate and haven't had any life experience that was echoed there.

[–] krautdoggg 10 years ago

Watch "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" and then criticize Revolutionary Road.

[–] catbird-18939 8 years ago

Exactly the movie I was thinking of while watching this movie. You have a point.

[–] vonhoffmangunther 10 years ago

If you look at the TV Moonlighting, David Addison and Maddie Hayes were arguing with each other. The same thing with Captain Stanley White and Trazy Tzu in the movie Year of the Dragon.

BTW, my family members were like that in the movie arguing over anything and everything even if it was a minor thing and they never admitted that they were wrong on anything even when the facts were against them.

[–] movieliker1 9 years ago

The point of this movie is to tell men, don't marry a woman who tells you she doesn't want to live a boring, monotonous, suburban life and then shove the boring, monotonous, suburban life down her throat.

Also, don't threaten your wife with violence and have an ongoing affair with your secretary.

Frank was a terrible husband. No wonder April ended up dying in the end.

[–] chas437 8 years ago

Frank was a terrible husband, and April was a terrible wife/mother, and she killed herself. Its a mistake, and perhaps misses the entire point of the film, to take sides.

This film hits close to home for anyone who's been through divorce, I've been in those arguments.

[–] movieliker1 8 years ago

April was a good wife and mother until Jack drove her to two bad decisions --- sleeping with her neighbor, and having an abortion. Jack was the reason this family fell apart.

[–] chas437 8 years ago

So Jack MADE her sleep with the neighbor and abort herself? It had nothing to do with her own delusions?

Wow.

[–] movieliker1 8 years ago

Don't be ridiculous chas. Nobody said that.

[–] chas437 8 years ago

April was a good wife and mother until Jack drove her to two bad decisions

You said this.

[–] movieliker1 8 years ago

You are being simple-minded and/or argumentative chas. I never said he was "totally" responsible. I said he was "more" responsible.

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

The grass is always greener so be thankful for what you do have is the point of this film.