MovieChat Forums > Irrational Man (2015) Discussion > I think people might be missing the main...

I think people might be missing the main theme of this film

posted 9 years ago by balbin-3
44 replies | jump to latest

Most comments and reviews I have read about this film have spoken about the theme of morality, about how far a person is willing to go and still feel ok with themselves or about how the movie should have ended.

However, I think the main theme that Allen was commenting on was hypocrisy. Whether or not you agree with what Abe did, at least his actions were in line with his feelings and beliefs after hearing the conversation. However, Jill had the exact same feelings about wanting the judge to die, and when she found out he was dead, she even went so far as to celebrate it. But then when faced with the fact that Abe had caused the death, she suddenly changed her views and judged Abe, despite her original desire and relief for the judge to die. I think this is what Allen is making a comment on with the movie.

It is about the hypocrisy of people to think and want one way, but when it comes to their actions, act a completely different way.

[–] Ace_Spade 9 years ago

Well, on hypocrisy, you could also comment on Abe's hypocritical attitude towards the subsequent events. He justifies the murder because it's eliminating a guilty (or horrible) person, but he refuses to accept responsibility when it looks like somebody else will suffer for his actions. He's condemning an innocent man and he won't turn himself in because of his zest for life (which should, if anything, prompt him to really value the freedom of the innocent man). All of that relates back to the discussion on Kant (I think it was Kant, anyway) near the beginning of the film.

I don't think hypocrisy was the main theme, though. I agree with you, though, with people becoming too fixated on the death/murder plotline and missing major themes and details. Abe's struggle is to find out if life is worth living and he finds it in this dark and twisted place. I think that the main questions of the movie (yes, morality, yes hypocrisy) are related to Abe's struggle for meaning and what it means to act and what makes somebody valuable and what makes life worth it, in the end.

[–] aarone2884 9 years ago

It was the hypocrisy of how his descriptive ethics are applied, as opposed to the Kantian Deontological ethics (which he lampoons) which would only lead to un-happiness, desptie being truelly moral.

Ethics ought not be used to improve your lot in life, despite your rationale in thinking it is noble to knock off a judge.

Well it is not. The ideal is sold out.
The movie was making a point... not lying about the jews in the attic is the best thing to do. You cant stop evil nazis by lying to them. ie: you cant fight evil with evil.

[–] Ace_Spade 9 years ago

So, you wouldn't lie about hiding Jews from Nazis?

[–] aarone2884 9 years ago

It depends what i value more, self preservation or the moral law i ascribe too.

I deeply believe Kant is correct, so i believe in the greatest conceivable world possible that there is no lying... so there ought be no lying in this world.

For Abe he does not feel that is possible, becuase his moral epistemology seems to be utilitarian...aka: "the greater perceivable rationalized good".

Unfortunately we see that morality fail in the movie (look where it ends up when he kills a man to make theworld a better place!), and many other places... like the Trolley Dilemma.... this is a great video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBdfcR-8hEY

If i was hiding jews i would probably lie to the nazis, and that would still be immoral.

You dont lie. You dont cut in line. You dont use people as a ends to a means.

All things we think we can do.... until that moment when we have tooo... like speaking up in defence of someone despite creating divisions.

[–] Ace_Spade 9 years ago

See, I agree with Kant, that lying would not exist in the greatest conceivable world, but that world wouldn't have Nazis or Jews hiding in the attic, either.

In this world, there is no possibility of escaping without, at some point, selecting the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods. I think that, in our world, lying can be beneficial or even good, in some sense, when it prevents disaster (the Nazis and the attic, or any number of diplomatic evasions which happen at the UN or the Senate to avoid war or calamity).

Consider also: if a friend of yours asks the question, "Do you like my hat?", they're often just saying (not asking - saying) "I like my hat and I want to enjoy it - please, enjoy it with me." In that sense, the intention is not to get a critical appraisal or evaluation of the hat, the intent is simply to declare a fondness for the headgear. So, since the question isn't, in essence, a question, should the (lie) answer of "I love it!" be considered a lie? Or simply a response to the suggestion that you enjoy your friend's hat with them?

So, how much of lying being immoral has to do with the immorality of the alternative? Or the intention of the question? As with the hat example, if the questioner isn't interested in a real answer, is it a lie to say otherwise?

I'm very interested in your thoughts.

[–] cagneychick182 9 years ago

I think the film is about philosophy vs reality. Just as Abe asks his class if they would turn in Anne Frank. You can theorize how the world would be better without a terrible person in it but that's just philosophy. Actually killing someone is making a decision.

I also think the film is about finding purpose. She thought that his change was because he had found purpose in her. He had actually found purpose in murder. And she thought she had purpose in Abe when it was really Roy that was the healthy choice.

***
Truth be told, I had to see you one more time, even if it was from a distance.

[–] Howlin Wolf 9 years ago

Abe was hypocritical too! After the innocent man was arrested, following Kant's categorical imperative, Abe would have no choice but to turn himself in... However, he doesn't - even trying to kill Jill and proving Kant's point that a world where one lie is justified will lead to another. This shows that - as he said in the beginning - philosophical theorizing is hollow, and loses meaning upon being applied to real-world actions.



"Your mother puts license plates in your underwear? How do you sit?!"

[–] bear022013-909-645034 8 years ago

We all left the theater when the same old "blame the Nazi" line was blurted out.
Demanded our money back and GOT it.all 14 of us.
Same old *beep*

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]