MovieChat Forums > Take This Waltz (2012) Discussion > The film doesn't show enough dissatisfac...

The film doesn't show enough dissatisfaction

posted 12 years ago by pushtouch
12 replies | jump to latest

I find the movie interesting and gorgeous at times. I wish that consequences of her choice were given more screen time and not just the last 20 minutes, I think her flirting and life with her husband took up too much time of the movie with some scenes running way too long (pool scene).
Coming here and reading some of the posts I realized I must have not paid close attention when watching it because the general consensus is that she was sexually dissatisfied(among other things) with her marriage. I didn't get that at all. I found her childish and immature, but also through their interaction and playing games I thought they had a normal sex life. When they are shown cuddling and fooling around in the bed I always assumed there had been sex or there was going to be, it's just the director didn't show it to us. So when I saw her hugging him from the back and being all very touchy-feely while he was cooking I thought to myself: "damn, woman. don't be such a pain in the ass. can't you see he's in the middle of something. give him a break." The idea that all of a sudden he should have thrown her on the table, ripped her clothes off and satisfied her was never in the back of my mind. I found her complaint of him not responding to her seduction nonsensical. The woman was always bothering him when he was cooking! And that's his thing, his passion! You don't mess with your man's mojo when he's in the zone! Sure, there was boredom and him taking her for granted (the anniversary dinner) but her supposed sexual dissatisfaction was not properly conveyed. There should have been other scenes showing him not being into it (and not when he's cooking), which would have made later sex scenes in the loft more purposeful and not like they came out of the blue.

[–] TracesOfLove 12 years ago

No you didn't miss anything. That's how I saw it as well. She's in a happy relationship but then she meets this new guy and there's this amazing chemistry. He makes her feel different and a little dumb, making her question herself. After that she keeps finding reasons to be dissatisfied in her current relationship. She also feels guilty about it. She left because the animal magnetism confused her. She didn't want to cheat so she tried to do the right thing and leave her relationship before she engaged in her lust. She idealized this lust and confused it with love. The new guy said things that made her feel like she wasn't living the life she should. And the problem wasn't with her relationship with her husband. The problem was with herself.

...even in a valley without mountains the wind could still blow.

[–] antcrynoveru 11 years ago

Beautiful analysis!

[–] srvgirl 12 years ago

I disagree. The film showed a few instances... in the street they start missing and then he starts playing thumb wars. And when they were in bed once they agreed to have sex and both went to pull down their own pants. Lou and Margot had a real connection, but not a 'throw you down on the table' one, which she desired.

[–] thor74 12 years ago

Agreed, they definitely had a connection, but there were definitely intimacy issues on his end. Constant rejection and when he finally agrees to have sex ( he say "ok" as if she'd been asking all day), they not only take off their own pants but underneath the covers. Is he in 9th grade or is he a grown man?

[–] corsi71inc 12 years ago

Thor, is the hypocrisy of your last 2 sentences intentional?

THEY not only take off their own pants but underneath the covers. Is HE in 9th grade or is HE a grown man?

Words yours, caps mine. THEY, a married couple, have a problem getting on the same page. HE, as the man, has the responsibility for the problem? Sad, sad, sad.

You might have noticed the Loft Montage at the end of the film, in which

SPOILERS AHEAD

Margot and Newguy *beep* their brains out in a multiple of positions, have threesomes with both male and female lovers, and yet somehow...

Margot still ends up a completely immature and unhappy woman.
Did'ja stop and consider, for maybe just a sec, that Margot's problem was Margot? That she needed to figure out who she was and what she wanted before blaming everyone else around her and bailing out on a good man?

Just wondering.

1. Being moody.
2. Being bad at maths.
3. Being sad.

[–] melissahelm30 12 years ago

Cors (this is Thor74. i can't remember my passowrd to that account!),

I really don't get why you would consider this hypocritical:

THEY not only take off their own pants but underneath the covers. Is HE in 9th grade or is HE a grown man?

You got me on that one. I must be sad, sad sad...

Margot is unhappy at the end, but at least she is going after what she wants (or thinks she wants). Regadless of if she made the right decision or not, she made a decision. She decided to leave a lifetime of rejection and 'let's hide our private parts under the covers' with a manchild for someone who is at least in the same age group. Seth Rogan's character may have been a good guy, but he was clearly not the guy for her.

Did'ja stop and consider that Margot was not happy even before the new guy came along? How does one figure out who they are if they don't take risks or follow their hearts every now and again?

[–] corsi71inc 12 years ago

Ms. Helm,

you are strenuously defending Margot's decision making and 'risk taking', but achieving little other than farcically insulting her husband. You cannot seem to help but lay all of the blame for her unhappiness on her husband's feet. He may NOT have been the right man for her, but that is because NO ONE was going to be the right man for a woman who is dissatisfied with everything she has. And yes, it was patently obvious that she was not happy before the new guy came along. She was that unhappy before she married the chef, and no man was the cause of it. To constantly mock him for her emotional state is really quite unrealistic.

What she did by leaving her marriage, imho, was not being bold or daring or brave. It was cowardly and immature. Her decision to run into another man's bed was very much alike being overwhelmed by the tilt-a-whirl while "Video Killed the Radio Star" blasts out. Sure, it is fun and freeing and quite silly, but all of a sudden real life cuts off the music and kills the strobe light. And you are left with nothing more or less than what you came in with.

Margot may not have wanted to go back to her marriage, but that final scene between the 2 of them shows that she had some serious misgivings and some clearly unresolved issues (there's a shocker). But it was too late. Her "risk taking" to achieve what she wants (or "thinks she wants" as you observed) had done nothing but given her a little more experience and given her ex some heartbreak. To what end? None, as she refuses throughout the movie to learn anything from her experiences.

Sorry, but I do think that is rather sad. She has my sympathy, she really does, though I save my respect for those that try and fail, not those that try until they just give up.

1. Being moody.
2. Being bad at maths.
3. Being sad.

[–] AfroGeek 12 years ago

I think a lot of people posting are conflating her interest in the artist with disinterest in her husband; mixed in with their preference for the artist as well. I saw it the same way you did.

Your comments are one of the reasons I thought Rogen was the wrong actor. He simply doesn't have the chops to make it clear what's really going on in the husband's mind. I took him to be quite satisfied with the routine and "boredom" of their marriage. There were plenty of hints that he did love her and obviously the reverse which is why the outcome took so long.

And, I think it's telling that she has a stalled career while his is taking off.

Amy: I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!

[–] intofilm 12 years ago

SPOILER: people keep talking here about her dissatisfaction taking the form of wanting to be "thrown down on the table." I don't think that was what was drawing her to Daniel initially. He was handsome and fit, and had a spell-binding way of gazing at her, but I thought his main appeal was his use of language. She was a writer, so words are important to her, and her husband didn't know how to communicate verbally in any kind of interesting way. Instead they played all sorts of childish games.
Then she meets Daniel, who is masterful with words, who keeps tantalizing her with his extraordinary statements, and then seduces her mentally with his sensual answer to her wondering "what would you do with me."
He is imaginative and creative verbally in ways that fascinate her, ways that her clunky husband can't come up with. From the time Lou refuses to converse with her at their anniversary dinner, the relationship was doomed, because of the enormous contrast with what Daniel offered, both in his promise of exciting sex, but also his skill at verbal wooing.
Then, once the relationship with Daniel is shown to be simply a playing out of the sexual attraction, so it has lost its interest, and he has stopped talking to her, it's clearly the winding down of that affair as well.
The sex was a big part of what happened, but I think the role of language was equally important.

[–] senpaidude 11 years ago

I had exactly the same feeling.

In addition I think she might have just wanted to release her lust for the neighbour guy in the cooking scene.

On my opinion, and based on my feelings about the movie, it was quite realistic presentation of how it might go in a longer relationship.

I didn't see any sexual dissatisfaction. The main things I saw were a stable relationship and giving in to a crush a little by little. Realistic view how the excitement of the relationship disappears in time, and how something else might look better when it actually necessary isn't that.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] IL_Maestro 11 years ago

When she hugged him from the back while he was cooking, that was after the cyber sex scene in the bar
she needed her husband to exist for her to help her fight her falling to Daniel
or maybe she did it coz she felt guilty
ppl might make excuses if they wanna sympathize with her I guess and others would hate showing her as a good person with a huge mistake instead of an evil woman doing everything wrong coz they just want it that way
the later sex scenes maybe were there to show they tried everything Lou might be accused of, like not being able to throw her on the table and have sex with her
as later she regrets what she did, so it wasn't really abt it.

"It is never about what happened, it is only how you look at it!"