disturbing ending
New Canaan Project more like the Nude Wank Project.
sharebut he wasn't nude! he just had his pants at his knees,
this show in general has been disturbing from the begining
MovieChat Forums > Rectify (2013) Discussion > disturbing ending
He's really the wrong roommate for Daniel. This should have been vetted better by Avery.
I hope this doesn't lead to Daniel returning to jail.
i think after his outburst next episode, there is going to be a long hard talk with avery,
this guy doesn't seem ready for the halfway house, everybody else seems alot more wise, and mature, even the young black guy,
this guy just seems like a punk, but it may have been a test by avery, or coulda just been that guy because there is a vacancy
or they could go down the truly tragic road, in the last episode have Daniel Exonerated, only to have his roommate stab him, while chloe is out shopping with Janet, getting ready to move Daniel back to paulie , only to come back and have Daniel die in both their arms having Janet let out a Shriekey cry like the first episode, bringing everything full circle
[deleted]
Lets be perfectly honest. I don't find his roommate to be any more of a punk than Daniel is. It is a half way house for convicts and felons.His roommate seems like those people who are always overly hyper. Always sticking their nose in and saying the wrong things in public. Might be a little insane and just scrapes by his crimes without an insanity plea. But then ask yourself who is Daniel? Daniel has his own set of mental problems. He's also a convicted rapist and murderer, and proven sexual and physical assaulter (though not yet charged), among other things. Daniel's a sick SOB. Daniel is no better than his roommate. In fact, its very likely his roommate is more of an upstanding citizen than Daniel is.
The New Canaan Project is not the bastion of good and moral people. It is a half way house for convicts and felons. Daniel ain't a saint. Daniel is no better than anybody else there.
I couldn't believe when I read this crap?!..You compare Daniel to other convicts?.. If you have watching this show this far and how you can make this kind of bold statements then you are seriously missing the point. You seem to have a huge dislike for Daniel, but please share WTF did Daniel ever do in the entire four seasons of this show other than grab Ted from behind once and put him out?..something he must have picked up on prison and Ted deserved it. To me Ted is actually the biggest Jerk on this show.
You think anyone who is been in prison locked up in solitude for 19 years wouldn't have "Mental problems"?..you are really detached from reality. This entire show has been questioning Daniel's guilt and it's still unclear he was a rapist/ killer, considering all the other stuff that is slowly unraveled since this show started with that scum bag " Trey", then for you to assume Daniel is the real killer?..that just goes to show how disconnected you are with theme of this show
I wonder Why the do you even watch this show? Maybe you relate to the guy who is Daniel's room mate and jacks up at night and that's why you defend him...Lol share
[deleted]
You apparently miss the multiple episodes where Teddy was so jealous and insecure over the attention Daniel was getting that he intentionally goaded him by inferring that he WANTED to be raped in prison and even liked it.
Teddy got what he deserved.
Only in brutalist terms did Teddy get what he "deserved," as Daniel himself recognized, and expressed to Tawney. His act was in line with the brutal, extreme culture of prison, not with that of the outside, in civil society. That kind of thinking is opposite to the spirit of the story, which clarifies that he made a mistake.
His act wasn't about justice, but revenge. About indulging emotion, not reason. Short-term satisfaction over long-term harm, for both parties. It's the identical attitude as Teddy's to begin with.
DANIELAnd this:
After the baptism, he told me to stay
away from you. He was your husband,
and I know he was right. And I told him
I would. Then he said some other things.
TAWNEY
What things?
DANIEL
Just words Lined up together. I've heard
them before. Similar, anyway. They're
just words, but he was afraid. He was
afraid of losing you. But I couldn't see
that then. I hurt him. Humiliated him.
Something I learned in prison.
Something to make a man feel
powerless. It wasn't rape. But it was
violent. And--
TAWNEY
And what?
DANIEL
Unhinged. I wish I could go back.
Because he didn't deserve that.
And he doesn't deserve to have to
live with it.
TAWNEY
He never said anything. I always
thought it was me.
AMANTHAOther than that, I would offer the general advice to starve the troll.
Why? Daniel, why?
DANIEL
What good would it have done,
Amantha?
AMANTHA
For one, Bobby Dean's skeezy ass
would be in jail right now.
DANIEL
To what end?...
AMANTHA
He almost killed you, Daniel.
DANIEL
It doesn't matter.
AMANTHA
What doesn't?
DANIEL
What would happen next, Amantha?
I mean, Bobby would go to prison,
his mother would go to visit, and
then after that, and after that.
When would it ever end?
"You must not judge what I know by what I find words for." - Marilynne Robinson share
Teddy got what he deserved.
That would never be said if Daniel did the exact same attack on a woman who was taunting him. Taunting doesn't mean he deserved to be attacked. Daniel's action is many times more serious than Teddy saying some mean things. share
The whole point of the exercise was emasculation and a forced lesson in empathy for male rape. It would thus be completely pointless if done on a woman. Women feel sexually vulnerable all the time as it is, and have no trouble empathising with rape victims because so many of them have either experienced it, know someone who has or are at constant risk of it themselves even without going to jail.
shareIt would thus be completely pointless if done on a woman.
It was an unhinged emotional flip out by Daniel, not something with a point in any case.
Regardless people are all different and I have no doubt if a woman hated Daniel they might say that or something similar which triggers his rage. Not everyone (man or woman) has empathy. If Daniel did his "lesson" on her no one would say she deserved it.
What I find very weird (in general not at you specifically) is this sense of downplaying Daniel's attack on Teddy since it's almost like downplaying the prisoner's attacks on Daniel just because it's a male on a male. Almost glorifying Daniel as a coffee cracking anti-hero, only assaulting the guys that deserve it.. share
What I find very weird (in general not at you specifically) is this sense of downplaying Daniel's attack on Teddy since it's almost like downplaying the prisoner's attacks on Daniel just because it's a male on a male. Almost glorifying Daniel as a coffee cracking anti-hero, only assaulting the guys that deserve it..Yeah it's kind of disturbing. Sure Teddy was being a dick, but I don't know too many people who wouldn't be upset when their spouse is obviously attracted to another. Like Teddy should have rolled over on his back paws up. What guy does that?
Then after the attack Daniel and goes out and eats two chicken dinners! I also have a less positive view of him confessing to Tawney what he did to her husband, yet he wouldn't even tell his own mother.
Rectify - parody pix
https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-TLG67x/
share
Like Teddy should have rolled over on his back paws up. What guy does that?
Or there is a 3rd option, which most reasonable adults would opt for. It's to ask Daniel politely to keep his distance, while being sensitive about his circumstances. Even when asked rudely, Daniel already acquiesced to the request and WALKED AWAY.
Makarov, I get your point about people perhaps being too lenient on Daniel, because he's written and acted so sympathetically. What I don't understand is you bringing gender into this for several reasons:
1) Daniel has shown no aggression towards women throughout the show. If he had, the show would've been over in 2 seconds, because that would make him the obvious culprit of the whodunit. Him assaulting a woman in this way simply would never be a part of this show or his character.
If there was another show or film where the same incident was portrayed happening to a a woman - then I would understand trying to compare the actions of that perpetrator to Daniel. As it stands, however, it simply does not fit in the Rectify world, so theorizing about the morality of it makes zero sense. That's like wondering what would happen if Bambi's mum had been a horse instead of a deer. Would that make the hunters look worse?
2)People best empathise with misfortunes that they can picture easily happening to them. Adult men generally feel pretty safe from rape if they stay out of prison. Women, on the other hand, never feel safe from it anywhere. It's a constant hanging threat for any one of them at any time. For this reason, they are very unlikely to show such a blatant lack of empathy for it as Teddy did. Even if they did, the psychological reasons behind it would be different, and there would need to be a different approach to teaching them an equivalent brutal lesson. The mock rape would achieve nothing of dramatic significance or character development for this show.
So again - it's not part of the Rectify universe. I can, however, picture it on something like Orange is the New Black.
3)Daniel's rage was methodical. He didn't simply smash Teddy's head into a wall as with Trey (can't remember what exactly he did to Trey). His head was cool enough to carry out a relatively elaborate assault with a highly symbolic meaning. He intended for it to have a specific psychological effect - which would only work in this precise way on a man. So the point of the exercise very much matters. If it didn't - it wouldn't exist on the show and McKinnon would've written a more generic impulsive attack, which could perhaps be discussed as gender-neutral.
And for a 3rd time - a generic impulsive attack on a currently alive female character would not be a part of Rectify's world, because its entire premise is built on a generic attack on the central dead female character. It would dilute its focus.
share
Maybe Daniel has some code of conduct against aggression towards females, we don't really know because there are no female characters hostile towards him on the show. It's unexplored and maybe for good dramatic reasons like you mention.
The reason I bring up gender is not that I think Daniel attacking a woman fits into the Rectify world but because of what it reveals in viewer response. Responding that he was mean so he had it coming, he's just getting a well-deserved lesson, that was just coffee in his crack not sexual assault, etc would be pretty outrageous if it was a female. That's a reaction I find that very weird towards a human character in that situation.
[deleted]
Responding that he was mean so he had it coming, he's just getting a well-deserved lesson, that was just coffee in his crack not sexual assault, etc would be pretty outrageous if it was a female.
Theoretically, if a woman said those same hideous things to him, I'd also think that she had it coming in terms of poetic justice and I still wouldn't consider it sexual assault. However, people's perceptions are quite understandably coloured by womens' physical vulnerability and the fact that men abuse it to high heaven every damn day. Our entire social system is structured on that fact.
There is more of an equal playing field with 2 men in a situation like. Also, I think that you're mixing up poetic justice in fiction with an actual moral code in people's perceptions. Have you never heard of revenge porn? share
[deleted]
Some of your comments really have me scratching my head. Bro code is doing your business at a suitable time in private.
'My question is what his roommate was getting off on.'
Pretty sure you're trolling.
[deleted]
The bro code is you do not whip it out and go to town while your roommate is trying to sleep. I think that's not even a bro code it applies to everybody.
share[deleted]
It's not likely that he entered the room and got ready to sleep while the roommate was already doing that, since it clearly bothered him he would have turned around and walked out.
share[deleted]
Even if he was having a little foreplay, he should have stopped once Daniel entered the room and finished elsewhere. That's just common courtesy. Daniel shouldn't be the one to get up and leave as they're both sharing the room equally. If he was a guest in someone else's house then maybe I'd understand but they're roommates in a halfway house.
share[deleted]
its not bro code, it is disrespectful convict code, especially when asked not to do it infront of him,
they aren't locked in a cell overnight, he is free to go to the washroom, or even do it in the shower,
[deleted]
Any normal human would go 'relieve' themselves in the bathroom with the door closed. C'mon man don't blame this creeps actions on Daniels PTSD that's just wrong.
sharehe asked him not to, as indicated in the preview, but his reaction is amplfied by his traumatic experinces, so the ptsd certainly comes into account
shareAny normal person would react that way, PTSD has nothing to do with not wanting people jerking off in close proximity to you, especially after you have told them not to. To say Daniel got mad at this because he has PTSD is laughable.
share[deleted]
i agree with the coffee cracking not being normal,
but once again, i ask have you ever tried mushrooms?? do you know what a dark trip is like? a bad trip? imagine finding you girlfriend dead in your worst nightmare, and slowly as the veils of the nightmare slip away, coming to grasp that it wasn;t the hallucinogen causing the darkness, but the reality, wouldn;t you be tramnatuzed?
he got ass raped, and send to the injection chair 5 times, locked in a box, can we really judge him for his post incarceration actions, well at least judge him to standards of an average person?
i am not even saying it is an excuse to act out, but it is a mental infliction that needs to be treated, whether he killed hannah or not, cuz we know he didn't rape her
The show stated he thought Daniel was asleep which is why engaged in self massage after Daniel was already home in bed. FYI
shareYou don't need a magazine or the internet to take care of business. Mental images/fantasies is all you need. And I very much doubt he was using Daniel for entertainment lol. You have a wild imagination mate.
shareYou don't need a magazine or the internet to take care of business. Mental images/fantasies is all you need.
According to sign, nobody in the history of humanity had pleasured themselves prior to the invention of the printing press. share
[deleted]
[deleted]
The roommate was just in his bed doing his business. I didn't see a magazine. I didn't see him in front of a computer. Nothing.
Perhaps he has a better imagination that you seem to have.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue. share
lol definitely vomit inducing ending
shareI felt so bad for Daniel. After all those years of being forced to listen to that monster getting off to the most horrific fantasies and memories imaginable, now he has this assgrenade for a roommate, bringing it all right back up for him.
"That quiet confidence that comes with being completely off your nut."
[deleted]
But that would be totally out of line to use the community coffee for that purpose. If he does he needs to buy his own. That's just the courteous thing to do.
And I don't think he wanted to go back to that place he is just traumatized and froze in a fetal position. Like a child who has been sexually abused might freeze in situations that remind them of their assault.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
And he himself was sexually assaulted in prison. Glad he got a new roommate in the new episode.
shareNobody deserved the coffee cracking. Tell us, how often do you assault people because of disagreements? And then tell us how many years you've served in jail.
And Daniel agrees with you. He said Teddy didn't deserve it. You should give Daniel points for that. But then you never yield on Daniel. You defend all Teddy's bad acts but won't even acknowledge that Daniel said he was wrong to do what he did to Teddy.
How do you feel about Teddy breaking into his house? That all right, too?
share
[deleted]
Was it 'wrong'? Maybe, perhaps, just a tiny little bit. Only the bit about maybe respecting Tawney's private space a bit more than he had. Recognizing full well he was very respectful up until that lapse of judgement. But he never did anything illegal and he was not of sound mind at the time after the divorce and the alcohol.
It's interesting that you give Daniel no slack after spending 20 years in prison, being repeated sexually raped/molested there. But you give Teddy a pass because he's "not in his right mind" because he was drunk and sad over the divorce.
There's no way you can make right what Teddy did. He broke into the house Tawney now lives in, alone, without him, by his full agreement. It would have been the same if he'd broken into an apartment she was occupying. It was illegal and immoral.
You're a hard man, Sign....assuming you really believe the things you post, which I seriously doubt.
share
[deleted]
And no, it was not illegal. He was still the owner. No official separation documents are filed. No restraining order. What's illegal about it? It's his house that he spent every dollar earning to pay down! How much did unemployed Tawney contribute to the house? Lets all take a guess.
Take it to court and see if it's considered illegal. Tawney had a "right to privacy" to which Teddy agreed, and he violated it, just as he would had he broken into the house next door....which doesn't have his name on the deed. She had the locks changed because she now considers it her private abode. Her's. No longer his. It he had legitimate ingress and egress, he'd still have a key and wouldn't have to break in.
You don't know if Daniel did the crime he was in prison for or not. You're assuming because he was convicted of it. Even so, he, a 16 year old boy, was sexually assaulted while there. That is a violation of his right to the privacy of his own body, of him, no different than female rape. It shouldn't happen to anyone. Did it make him a little reactive? Yeah, probably. Teddy taunted him, insulted him, and Daniel over reacted; it's something he learned in prison. He knows it was wrong and has said so. Can Teddy ever forgive him? Perhaps not.
The writers are deliberately drawing parallels between Teddy and Daniel. Different circumstances, different personalities, different attitudes, but some of the same behaviors -- how they react to and with others. And then how they react to -- see -- those behaviors. Teddy is defensive, righteous, unrepentant and unforgiving. Daniel is repentant and culpable and willing to forgive....or at least trying.
But I'm not really arguing with you, Sign, or trying to get you to see something different; I know it's futile. Just sharing perspective. share
[deleted]
I don't know why I'm doing this......ego, probably.
But:
On a human-to-human level, and as lovers, yes Teddy was wrong for not securing Tawney's permission first before entering his own home. But I don't think it is illegal though. Their separation was not officiated in any legal sense. Do you know of similar legal cases where it was considered trespassing and B&E for a husband to enter his house, just because they are now sleeping on different beds so to speak at the time after a falling out? If the husband and wife had divorce papers filed, sure. But that's not the case here.
As lovers has nothing to do with it. It is a legal premise. Imagine this Q&A in court:
A: Did you give your wife possession of the house, Mr. Talbot? Agree that she live there and you would live somewhere else, when the two of you separated?
T: Yes.
A: And did she tell you she had changed the locks?
T: Yes.
A: Was it your understanding, then, that she considered the residence her residence, that she felt safe and secure there? That you would not come and go in it without her knowing, without her acknowledgement and permission?
T: Yes.
A: Do you know that she changed the security code?
T: Yes.
A: And when you removed the screen and jimmied the window and entered the house, are you aware that those are things a burglar does when he "breaks in" to a house that he does not have legal entry to?
T: Yes.
What Teddy did was illegal. Doesn't matter if they were "legally" separated or not. Many states don't even recognize "legal separation" until someone files for divorce. He broke into the house; it was illegal for him to do so.
His "being a gentleman" also does not enter into it. Do you think the court would say "Oh well, he was a gentleman in offering to let her stay in the house so we will forgive him breaking into it"? She didn't need his permission to change the locks or the security code. It is now her house. Until they divide the property in a divorce decree his name is on the deed, but it is considered her residence, no longer his.
If Teddy wanted to charge Daniel with assault he could have. He didn't, partly out of shame and partly because of family. But if he's going to, he better hurry because the statute of limitations is running.
Daniel is written to be more sympathetic than Teddy. We don't know what made Teddy as he is: controlling and dogmatic and possessive and sneaky. But it appears Teddy has had every opportunity, and still he has issues that make it difficult for him to have positive relationships with people. We do know -- or assume -- what made Daniel as he is: 20 years in solitary for a crime he may not have committed. He has more reason to have "difficulty".
share
[deleted]
it would be Teddy's word against Tawney's
Not if she wanted to press the issue. For example she could have their marriage counselor, Rebecca, testify that the couple have been seeing her, implying that it's much more than a single argument. There is also a paper trail showing that Teddy lives in a separate residence. And there are witnesses who could confirm the couple's separation, which Teddy himself acknowledged.
"You must not judge what I know by what I find words for." - Marilynne Robinson
it would be Teddy's word against Tawney's
(Edited because I now see the post this appeared in.)
But Teddy's word against Tawney's, in court, would be sworn testimony. Is he going to perjure himself? I hope even Teddy has better judgment than that. share
True, mme. But it would be Teddy's word against Tawney's, and without there being a legal separation, he could easily lie and say she changed the locks because they got into an argument.
share[deleted]
People need to take responsibility for their actions and own up to it. You need to draw the line somewhere when it comes to conveying responsibility.
Agreed. Then why not let Teddy take the responsibility for his actions, instead of constantly finding excuses for why he does what he does? He's not "a bit" controlling; he's very controlling.
I agree Tawney would not try to have him arrested for breaking into her house. But that doesn't mean it was not illegal. His consequences are actually far worse than if she called the police. He's erased all vestiges of trust she may have had in him. He's given her reason to feel unsafe with him. Who wants to reconcile with a man who would break into the house where you are living in order to retrieve his belongings, when he could do it upfront and in the daylight by knocking at the front door?
Teddy is clueless. That's his biggest fault and flaw -- his unwillingness or inability to see that what he does results in exactly the opposite of what he wants to happen.
share
[deleted]
Maybe he needs to enter the home for legitimate reasons from time to time, so you'd keep the locks unchanged if there was still trust there. For example, maybe he wants his fishing gear or his rifle for hunting.
Then why not arrive in daylight, knock on the door and tell her he wants them?
Tawney trusted Teddy enough to agree to "date night" with him. But then when she doesn't behave as he wants her to, he storms out. Teddy wants a puppet, and I agree Tawney has tried hard to be one, but even that doesn't make Teddy happy. It's hard to know what would make Teddy happy. Nothing seems to.
I hope Tawney has enough will -- I also agree she's far too passive, which is what Teddy liked about her -- to get herself a lawyer after this little break-in. And that she moves out of that two-story house which she clearly doesn't need and into something small and "only her's". And quickly puts Teddy Talbot in her rear view mirror.
share
[deleted]
I am just now reading this. Sign you are so crazy lol. I do truly hope the next time his roommate has a hot date with his hand Daniel does the right thing and gets lost.
share[deleted]
Who knows how far things can fly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFByovhuek4
18 feet is the record, and we all know manny has been practising in prison
Instead, Daniel stayed in bed and quietly listened. Sure, people can freeze up when stressed. Everyone's responses are different, especially with PTSD. But Daniel has to take some responsibility. Now I'm not going to insinuate that Daniel is something of a peeping tom and enjoyed it. Instead, I think arguably Daniel staying in the room listening to his roommate's sexy time made his PTSD worse - and that's a bad thing. But he has to own up to that because he owes it to himself and his sanity not to put himself in harms way.
this is one of the most accurate things you have said about Daniel
although some psychologists disagree, and think that facing you triggers and experiences is the way to a healthier degree of normalcy,
although not with a cock in you ear, and in a clinical setting share