MovieChat Forums > MovieLuver > Replies
MovieLuver's Replies
I agree, poisoning The Artist's pencils was brilliant! I was proud of her.
Let me, the lawyer, answer this question.
It looked like Cher, Josh, and the other guy (probably a junior attorney, contract attorney, or staff attorney) were doing document review, which is a process by which Cher's dad, an attorney with a client, has to turn over certain documents of his client to the opposing side's attorneys during a lawsuit via court order. I'm thinking that Cher's dad wanted her daughter, Josh, and the other guy to look for many documents with the August 28 date on them because they may have conversations that are either (1) privileged or partially privileged ("privileged" means private between the attorney (Cher's dad) and the client) that should be completely withheld from sending to the opposing side or partially redacted (i.e., blocked from view in certain privileged parts of the documents) before sending them over, (2) contain sensitive information that should thus be marked as "Confidential," so that the other side knows not to share those documents with a third party, or (3) incriminating to the client of Cher's dad, and hence Cher's dad would need to review those documents and come up with an argument to protect his client before sending those documents over to the other side's attorneys, who will surely use those documents against his client during trial.
And that lies the problem. Cher probably saw some documents with conversations that started on the date of August 28 and but continued on with less significant subject matter discussions until September 3. Instead of categorizing those documents as "August 28" documents, she categorized them as "September 3" documents, so now they have to retrieve those documents, re-categorize them as "August 28" documents, and make sure that Cher's dad has a chance to review those documents and see if they are privileged, confidential, or could potentially hurt his client. Basically, as the guy said, she set them back a day.
I hope this helps!
I'd watch!
Yeah, he could have been drawing Jake in the beginning.
In the beginning scene of the movie, The Artist is seen sketching someone while using a small candle to see before putting out the candle when a guard comes by. I think that he was able to convince one of the guards to give him a pencil and some sketch paper to draw with some time during the five years that he had been incarcerated.
It's possible that The Artist had already drawn Jake before his arrest, just like he had drawn Jake's partner. Maybe the art supplies were needed so that he could draw Mary's husband, Dale, and so that he could get into Dale's head to find out more information about Mary. That's my guess.
I was just thinking about the scene where all of the detectives rummaged through The Artist's belongings, when he is away from his cell, in order to look for clues. Dutch, the young male detective, looks at a drawing and says something like, "that's a person who looks familiar." I initially thought that was the drawing of Jake, but now I think that drawing was supposed to be one of Mary's husband, Dale. Dutch would have been able to tell if the person who was drawn was Jake.
I enjoyed Martin's performance. I think that Bad Boys for Life was Martin's comeback film, but this was the first time that he played a completely dramatic role without any comedy (except for maybe one very brief moment). I wanted him to have a little bit more screen time, but given the way that the movie progresses, I understand why that wasn't the case. Roxburgh, Malkovich, Knepper, and Grodnik were superb as well. I think that the critics so far are vastly undervaluing this movie. I really liked it. 7.5 out of 10.