Married people often cheat and lose their jobs, when that happens they get divorced. How can anyone see what she did, and why she said she did it, as anything other than psychotic? If this was a film about an insane, dangerous woman, and that's the way viewers saw it, then I have no issue. But I don't think that's what most people who watched it saw or felt.
shareThere are a lot of womyn [look it up] who think she's a hero...they are misandrists
shareThere are a lot of womyn [look it up] who think she's a hero...they are misandrists
And a lot of people are like you.
He called people who side with her misandrists: "a person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against men".
So basically that sounds like this person believes the husband did absolutely nothing wrong and people are simply against him for being a man.
I challenge you to come up with a better reason that explains why someone would take the side of a psychotic murderer, pathological liar, and serial abuser over a cheater.
shareApparently, Nick's desire to have sex, giving both his wife and lover pleasure justifies the choice of a woman to hurt, destroy, dismantle and take the lives of several people.
It's scary. But, we do live in a culture that allows this crap to happen on national television:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUna51rI_eQ
You forgot that she also married him because she believed him to be stupid and could be easily manipulated.
shareBut she's a very special person and go through people like they where made of paper. Who wouldn't want to get out of that relationship by cheating or whatever. She manipulates the viewer as well when she tells the story about how terrible he was. She's never the victim and can't be compared to woman in abusive relationships or chronic cheaters.
If you side with her, then that means that you believe infidelity deserves being framed for murder... Which is nuts.
He was an *beep* no disputing that - but her punishment still did not fit the 'crime'... so her behaviour is even worse, and siding with her is BEYOND sketchy.
How about siding with neither? They were both awful; she just took it to an unreasonable level.
"Your mother puts license plates in your underwear? How do you sit?!"
[deleted]
Wow. That's some pretty fascinating mental gymnastics you just pulled off there.
shareAnd a lot of people are like you.
[deleted]
[deleted]
I know it hurts but you must carry on.
shareIt's a crappy thing to say. To imply that the husband was completely fine in all his actions and he did nothing wrong. And that the only reason anyone would defend her is because they hate men in general.
I am responding solely to the comment, by the guy above me, about a lot of women being misandrists - aka "A person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against men".
You forgot to mention she also faked a sexual assault - because she suspected some guy was about to break up with her. She's a lunatic - who belongs in bodice-ripper yarns.
sharePeople who think she is hero...they are not misandrists, they are ****ing psychopaths. How can people support such criminal activity?
shareLinks? I never read such statement.
shareThey are idiots.
share[deleted]
As much as I hate being "that person" that brings up the book, I'm going to because it's the only way to justify this film. As much as I love the movie, it did not paint the picture of Nick and Amy like the book did. They were equally terrible: Amy was a perfectionist who did not let anyone forget about or lose interest in her, and if they did they paid for it. Nick was an *beep* a woman hater and very messed up from the way his father raised him and left him. They were equally horrible, both pretending to be someone they weren't, and when Amy returns home and becomes pregnant, the reason Nick stays, is so he does not turn out like his father and also because he wants to know if he can really love his child and raise him the right way, which sadly he probably ended up doing the same emotionally abusive parenting as his father. Also, Nick was the best and most successful form of himself when he first got with Amy, and he realizes it. He also is in fact addicted to how she makes him feel and ultimately cannot quit her. Amy's reminding him of this at the end of the film, that "you think you'd be happy with a small town Missourian girl, no way baby I'm it" or whatever the line. Yes she is a psychopath that just killed someone, but Nick is equally as screwed up and he realizes they cannot escape each other. They're ultimately a perfect fit. Remember though, this is fictional. Everyone that can't believe he would stay. Well no *beep* it's a fictional work. Not everything has to be realistic. I loved the book and the film, though both weren't always synonymous.
shareNick is kind of a dick, though the cheating may be because she drove him to it, or they were simply mismatched. She, on the other hand is a cold blooded murderer, there is no comparison, they are not alike.
shareOnce again you seem to not budge on this even though you haven't read the story. However, he must be a little crazy himself to stay with a murderer, wouldn't you say? We can just agree to disagree. Yes she's more psychotic, but he's pretty awful himself. You just weren't shown that entire side of him.
shareDisagree, a lot of people, 50%, marry the wrong person and get divorced. What he did 50% do. What she did is insane, she's a selfish, egotistical, psychotic, delusional murderer. He's an innocent baby compared to her. I don't care what the book shows or implies, he had a mistress, she's a murderer, you can't change that.
But of course, that's my original point, a lot of people think she's justified and he deserved to get framed for murder and spend life in jail. Ridiculous if you think that or anything like that.
I don't. But as someone that has read and seen gone girl several times, I know the characters to a tee, and what was portrayed on film was not equal to the book. Yes she is a psycho, no he didn't deserve to go to jail, all I'm saying is, he's more messed up than what was shown on screen and obviously since this is a fictional work, it's not going to be realistic. Everyone talks about the ending, but what is not said, is that they still dislike one another but they know that life with anyone else wouldn't work. That's why he didn't just go through with a divorce when she came back, he knew life would make less since without her.
shareBut that's exactly why this film is absurd, the ending is ridiculous and unbelievable. At the very least he should be afraid for his life 24/7, do you remember, he refused to sleep in the same room with her for while, maybe forever. He did it for the kid? Absurd. He did because he loves her, absurd. He did it because he can't find another woman to love, absurd. She wants him because of his appearance on TV, absurd.
You see, what I'm saying is this is a dumb story and a dumb movie, period. It doesn't matter what her mental makeup is, or his, because together, whatever you believe, this is a dumb, silly, pointless film.
Once again, that's all fine and great and you can hate the movie. But it's been a worldwide success, I work at a bookstore and it's still selling to this day. But that's what I love about fictional work. I've worked at a theater also, and some people love movies that aren't realistic, others don't because it's not realistic. Everyone is different. But not everything has to always realistic to be a good work. I really think of you read the book, just putting it out there again, you might see it a little differently. To each their own though. Good discussion.
share"But it's been a worldwide success, I work at a bookstore and it's still selling to this day. "
All I'd say is that it being a success does not necessarily make it a good book. In fact, something with mass appeal is, by its nature, usually of low quality. It has to be to HAVE mass appeal.
Next you'll be claiming that EL James is one of the greatest writers of our time... after all, 50 Shades was a worldwide success, right?
Glad I didn't even see this post because it's not worth arguing with someone who makes idiotic statements. I never said because it's successful it must be a good book. I read this book years before there was ever talk of a movie being made. I was discussing that it was a worldwide success now because of the film, or some wanting to know how the book differed from the film (it does) but thank you for taking my statement and turning it into your own delusional thoughts about fifty shades of grey. And just because some movies are made and are successful (whether or not they are good films), does not mean that the book equates to the film quality wise. That's most always never the case.
shareIn the book, Nick actually tries to kill Amy by strangling her, but he gives up not because he thinks it would be wrong, but because he's as crazy as her. He wants her, because he's a needy narcissist. And a cheater, a mythomaniac and a misogynist. You can say Amy was worst than him because she was a psychopat, but he's much more of a douchebag (actually, a psychopat) than everyone who sides with him here paints him to be.
Nothing unrealistic about the ending.
Exactly
shareBut, you were saying they are equally terrible. How? how how?
shareIt's not that they aren't both crazy/screwed up, it's that her craziness was much worse because it impacted other people in such a fatal way. Actually killing NPH, who was a bit creepy but mostly seemed to want to protect her, AND framing her scumbag husband for a crime that would essentially take his life and freedom [EDIT: literally take his life.. death penalty] is way out of bounds here....
I'm extremely anti-cheating. I've never once defended a cheater in real life or as part of a film, but this is the closest I've come to taking that position. I'm not even willing to take the position that her perfectionism and tediousness drove him to cheat. She didn't deserve that at all. After that much though, everything her character proceeds to do is just way, way worse.
Oh I agree on that, there's no way that she is sane in any way, but I hate how Nick's actions are completely justified after the fact. Just because his wife is a psycho doesn't take away from his own behavior. Just like you can't justify her killing a man because her husband was awful to her. My point is that they were both terrible to begin with and then being with each other brought it to another level.
shareYou can't justify his actions, no one did actually. We know what he is but putting him in the same bracket with her? Really, he is saint compared to her.
shareI get what you're saying her actions were obviously psychotic, but I was taking into account of how they were both represented in the book and they're both terrible people. Her killing someone does make her worse obviously, but I don't believe she killed because she loves killing, in her eyes she did what she believed she "had" to do in her eyes she thought the only thing she could do to get out of that situation, which of course makes her psychotic. Nick has a lot of hatred and its detailed more so in the book then in the movie. In the film he is only seen as a cheater, a bit of an idiot, and dealing with a lot of parental issues. The reason I compare he and Amy and call them a match made in hell, is because they are very similar. Both screwed up by their parents, Nick more so his father. They're shallow and self-loathing and never see the faults in themselves but despise the people that see them for who they are. That's why I put them in the same bracket. She killed a man, she's obviously more dangerous and mentally ill, but they both are very much alike.
sharewhat does she believes, she loves killing or not doesn't matter at all, a killer is a killer. Bottom line is that she is a killer and he is a cheater.
1. -she framed his husband-an innocent man for murder/kidnapping
-she murdered an innocent man and falsely accused him of rape and abuse.
-she framed her ex-boyfriend for rape.
anything missing? so, she framed at least three innocent people for murder,rape,abuse etc. Ruined their lives defamed them and killed one.
2. -he cheated her wife.
anything else?
very few relationships go smoothly, man/woman cheats each other, it's so common in our world.
Now, you really want to say they are very much alike? equally terrible? perfect fit?
GOD BLESS YOU.
You are talking about the book, tell me what else he has done in the book? BE SPECIFIC.
I don't have the *beep* book in front of me to pull passages for you. My argument is even before her plan to frame him for murder, they are equally terrible people. I explained to you how they were alike. Nick wasn't just a cheater. He took her money to start a career for himself, not to mention he was spending a lot of money beforehand when they were struggling to make ends meet. She moved for him and his family, she bought/rented the house, was more or less the breadwinner and even though he felt like less of man for that reason he still accepted and took her money. Then he cheated on her and basically blamed her for it after being a *beep* husband. They both put their feelings for themselves over one another first and blamed the other for the *beep* predicament they were in, however, they knew the best versions of themselves (though they were pretending in the beginning to be different people) were when they were together and realized that despite everything in the end, they wouldnt be able to move on from one another because they were pretty much ruined by each other. That is why they are equally *beep* people. Nick took from Amy and remained in his marriage while cheating on her, blaming her for his problems and didn't leave. He was a *beep* lazy, selfish man before her psycho plan. Neither one of them changed after the fact. If you read the book, come talk to me. I'm not going to write out a lesson plan. Not trying to take away from the fact that she's a psycho bitch, that's a given, but Nick is forgiven pretty easily when he's compared to her and I still see their similarities. If you don't, cool.
shareI have also read the book several times and saw the film twice. The film did not do the book justice. Llke Scarlett O'Hara, you can't possibly understand Amy from watching the movie. What's going on in her head is more telling than what comes out of her mouth. Same with Nick. He's a frighteningly hateful misogynist in the book (what goes through his mind is scary), but not in the movie. His father is barely touched upon in the movie, yet you can't really "get" Nick until you know his father... and the movie fails to allow you to do that. If you have not read the book, you don't know Nick at all, and it's understandable why you would see him as some poor schlub, an average Joe Nice Guy who just cheated on his wife (oops!) and that was his one flaw. NO. He's a pretty horrible person disguised as Aww Shucks Pretty Boy. But the movie only shows you the Aww Shucks side of him.
The movie did not portray the psychological aspect of their relationship; the mind games, the constant shifting of the balance of power due to those mind games, etc. To me it was the crux of the story, but the movie really didn't go there. It also left out important characters and spent too much time on inconsequential ones. Hilary Handy was missing. Talking to her was what made Nick really figure out he was being framed. They included Tommy O'Hara (but why make their meeting in person?) but left out the chilling note Amy sent him afterwards, gloating about how she'd set him up. That, plus the fact that she did the same thing to Hilary and sent her a similar note, I think were crucial turning points in the story that helped Nick see the pattern and understand how he was being framed, and how long/carefully she planned things (and why he didn't believe her story about Desi). Those two people and what happened to them were integral to the story, yet they only included one of them... and left out the denouement.
Other things were missing or misrepresented too, like Shawna Kelly. They totally misrepresented their interactions--she was all over him in the book, yet in the movie they met once and she angrily turned on him immediately... for an action that never even happened in the book. And OMG, that whole stupid made-up engagement scene at the book party... WTF?! I really could have done without that. It added nothing to the story. They should have cut that out and added the full Hilary and Tommy stories instead.
Also, the drunken video he made with the blogger girl was left out entirely... meanwhile, that's when the tide turned and people started liking him, and when Amy got sucked back in, thinking he loved her again. I thought the video was important, as it made people start believing him, and also started shifting the balance of power for the first time... he outwitted Amy. I also didn't like how they never let on that Nick started falling for her again via the clues--and she with him, after the video--before he realized what they were really about.
Toward the end, they never explored something I thought was pretty important… how Nick started to realize, to his horror, that Amy was right about the two of them being two halves of one twisted whole, and how he'd never be happy with anyone "ordinary." That they were stuck with each other in one long, eternal hell on Earth of a relationship. Like it or not. Instead, they portrayed him as angry at her the entire film, with no inner conflicts. In reality (the book), he was thinking about how he was falling back in love with Amy WHILE half-naked Andie was on top of him on Go's sofa, and was pushing Andie off him because of it. None of that back-and-forth of emotions is included in the movie... yet it's important to the story. This would have been a very different movie if it had been faithful to the book. I'll never understand why they found it necessary to change a story that resonated for a REASON and turn it into a Lifetime movie.
And don't even get me started on the ending.
awful vs psychotic, and you are saying pretty same.
shareNo one drives another person to cheat. He could have left long before she could set her plan in motion. He was just lazy. That is part of why Amy was so angry. He was never going to leave her. He was going to keep using the remnants of her money and keep pretending to Andie that he was going to leave.
shareHe was going to say he wanted a divorce the day she pulled the trigger on the whole scheme so...
Besides, him divorcing her is just as big of an insult to her insane ego as cheating on her. I agree he was stupid and gross for cheating but his punishment for asking for a divorce before being with anyone else would've been just as life ruining because Amy was a CRAZY PERSON.
So he claimed after the fact. I think he was lying to himself and his sister during that scene. He says he was going to tell her when he got back to the house after his walk. But he didn't go back to the house after his walk, he went to the bar. He only went to the house after the neighbor called. So his thought when he got to the house to investigate was to talk to Amy about a divorce? That is doubtful.
shareNick was a woman hater
[deleted]
I'm rereading my comments and I went too far in saying he hated all women, of course he loved Go and his mother, and of course he didn't walk out on the street and feel hate for every female he encountered. In the book though, Nick talked a lot about his dad and how his dad was a misogynist and a terrible person, but Nick shared a lot of the same qualities with his father. Anytime a woman did something that was in distaste to him or if one wronged him, he would think or say to himself terrible things about the woman and think about hurting them or killing them. He does this a lot. He may not hate women but he has a lot of rage against most of the women in the book. Yes Shawna Kelly was an idiot, so was the neighbor Nowelle Hawthorne, Ellen Abbott, Amy, yes they're all awful but the thing is Nick never takes responsibility for his own actions. He likes to blame and despise all these other women, even Andi at some point, and call them every name in the book but then he doesn't see his own actions as being wrong or maybe if I didn't do this, I wouldn't be painted this way. And Go even compares him to their father, because he does seem to act a lot like him, especially with his way of thinking.
shareThe reasons these two were so terribly screwed up was adequately addressed in the film (the parents). And the reason Amy was so over the top vindictive was, once again, the way she was brought up, to be the perfect child, which explained her manipulating and scheming. It all comes together, in a way, the reasons why she does what she dies, even if she's way over the top crazy. It even makes sense that Nick stays with her because hes screwed uo too, but the movie really seemed to make him out to be an innocent schmuck, which isn't quite what he was.
sharebut the movie really seemed to make him out to be an innocent schmuck, which isn't quite what he was.This really pissed me off. The only thing I can take away from it is the writer and director and possible they producer are all cheaters. It is Hollywood so it isn't surprising.
Wait, what did he do to her to deserve this?
Married people often cheat and lose their jobs, when that happens they get divorced. How can anyone see what she did, and why she said she did it, as anything other than psychotic?
The only thing I can take away from it is the writer and director and possible they producer are all cheaters.
In the book, Amy said that she didn't feel real. She felt a women's persona was made up, that you basically had to choose from a lineup to get a man. You had to be the kind of girl who drinks beers, plays video games, stays a size two, etc. She was angry with the world for promoting this stereotype, but she liked Nick enough to try.
She thought once they got married, she could kind of relax into her real self but Nick started having an affair with a young girl who promoted this very stereotype (in her mind). So she decided not to divorce Nick, knowing he'd move on without her, because she felt he stole a piece of her.. Thats kind of the why she goes off the rails.
-How many times do you have to make the same mistake?
-Till I get it right.
The kind of art that tends to get lots of attention imho is the art that is kind of based on reality, but exaggerated. If the story was perfectly normal and realistic, no one would care enough to buy a book or pay to watch a movie about it, why bother, we get plenty of realism in real life, we escape into art for something different, something more extreme. That said, I think this story is compelling because we recognize ourselves in it...maybe not the box cutter murderer part of it, but if you got cheated on and you didn't understand why maybe you would fantasize about that sort of revenge. I know women that string old boyfriends along ostensibly to be nice but maybe a little bit to stroke their own egos; I know men that feel like their wives pick them to death and they fantasize about being with someone younger and less opinionated. I know people that seem to have character flaws caused by their parents' mistakes. This story has those elements but in exaggerated form. I found the story quite compelling. I loved the twists and turns.
shareWell said, totally agree. Compelling is right, I keep meaning to read more of her books, great writer! Creates such believable real characters that slowly come to a "crazy" boil. When discussing the book a lot of my girlfriends, and even myself a little bit, loved Amy and thought she felt so real and sympathetic and hated Nick until the major reveal. Loved the reminder lesson on there being 3 sides to every story, his, hers and the truth. And I love how it does fake out man-hating then fake out women-hating only to have it end up being two significantly messed up individuals.
shareI think some of the comments here about how bad it is that some married couples cheat are way off base. People lose interest in their partners for lots of reasons, and the person that sleeps with other people or who looks for love and affection and sex with other people do it often times because their spouse has become a terrible partner. Yes, you can drive your partner to cheat and it can be your fault, it happens all the time. I think it would be better to get divorced before you cheat but that's not the full barometer for who is to blame for the pain.
I knew a guy once who was married to a woman who no longer turned him on sexually, so he slept with other people, in fact "cheated" on her. All of her friends and some of his friends blamed him and tried to punish him for cheating on her. I was not close enough to judge, but I did ask him why he cheated. He said it was her fault for not turning him on anymore. Yes, he was a direct person, but ironically in this case, he was right, it wasn't "his fault". Women can and do the same thing. I knew a really sweet, hard working guy who got married for love. But after 10 years of marriage, his wife grew close to new, wealthy friends. She thrived and grew but he just kept working, she didn't work. So after a year or so with her new friends, she saw her husband as provincial and stunted, especially regarding intellect and career earnings. So she divorced him on that basis. He was hurt, but was she justified?
I knew a woman who married for love and had a baby. After 6 years he told her was actually gay, that she didn't turn him on sexually, and he left her for a man. Whose fault was that breakup?
Personally, I think marriage is over hyped, outdated, antiquated and no longer needed for survival of the species. That's why the divorce rate is 50% and why people are getting married later and why fewer people than ever are never getting married. At one time, 98% of all the people in the world eventually got married. That's basically everyone. I'd check that stat in 10 or 20 years, it's going to have to be updated. In one sense, this film is about the futility of marriage as a vehicle for happiness and fulfillment. Many think it's the answer, but it turns out to be your downfall, just like this film, only hopefully without the throat slashing of an innocent person.
Cool, you know some people. But I think we all might know some people.
And the most over hyped, outdated and antiquated thing in this discussion is 50% fail rate of marriages. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1
I agree that "Married people often cheat" is inaccurate and cynical but think you missed the part where she has always been like this, she didn't have a "mental break".
She framed a man for rape and it ruined his life. She used NPH in high school and he tried to kill himself, she used him again later in life and murdered him to get her self out of a giant web of lies she spent months weaving that would've resulted in her husband being executed. She hocks a loogie in someone's drink because she said something unflattering about her.
In the book she had a friend in high school that she manipulated into pariahism because she was jealous she was becoming more popular. She was also cut off on the hi way by a semi and Nick overhears her lying to the complaint line about how she had kids in the car and their driver almost killed them & wouldn't stop until he was fired.
She's always been spiteful AND calculating. She painted him into a corner with a prenup and owning his source of income. He only "pursued" her because she let him, she's always 2 steps ahead or she drops you, if she can't have perfect control then she doesn't engage. She also never loved Nick, she is in capable of love for anyone else but herself. She wanted him because he fit the role of her delusional perfect life until he cheated, and then he fit again when he acted in his interview so she extorts him into acting that way forever.
It's not a good idea to apply exaggerated fictional scenarios to reality... there is no need to apply any real life lessons here. Actual healthy human love will never cause you to "break" or "become" a psychopath. You either already are or you aren't. I agree cheating is only done by the pathetic but what she does can't be defended.
Nothing, he simply choose to stay with her. No one stays in an unhappy marriage (with Amy!) because of media scrutiny. But Nick does, because he's always trying to be the good guy and seeks the approval of everyone. Margo tells him "You would actually kill just to keep your reputation" or something among the lines. This is cut from the movie, but in the book, he's as crazy as Amy. He wants her and he needs her, because he's a narcissist and Amy did all those things for him. After she tells him that, he's down.
sharenot much lots of people don't do. she was just a psycho. and he was just as sick as she was to stay with her. moron. (him, not you.)
He killed her spirit, in the simplest terms, she changed for him, she became the type women she hated to make him love her, to notice her, and when he started cheating and becoming more distant, she'd had enough. I can see why she did it, and why she was so angry and hurt by his constant lies and complete disinterest in her, only using her for sex, not even worried about her pleasure and happiness. But by no means do I condone what she did, she wanted him to pay face value for her pain. They are both selfish children who will happily destroy anything and anyone in their paths. It was a beautiful complex film. Everyone deserves to pay for something.
shareAs the Tyler Perry character said in the movie: They are both *beep* up!
Always look for the positive in every situation.
Did he put a gun to Amy's head to make her change and become "his type of woman"?? I don't remember that scene. I remember him being blindly starstruck by HER from the very beginning. Like most women, she put it in her head that she had to change and then, put it in her head that he somehow forced her to.
share