MovieChat Forums > HarveyManFredSin > Replies
HarveyManFredSin's Replies
You're right. There is NO evidence he killed his parents.
Firstly, how would he know who his parents were?
Secondly, before he's done his research in the Hall of Records, The Red Triangle Circus Gang refer to him as The Penguin, not Oswald.
And you're 100% right about the wasted potential. This is what Danny DeVito had to say about the character in the Making Of Book (which makes it CANON like anything else in the tie-in production material, particularly filmmaker and actor interviews): "The Penguin is a very intelligent man, someone who always wanted acceptance...I mean, his parents took a look at him when he was a baby and totally rejected him... ..but if they tried to understand that there was a human being inside that hideous 'penguin boy,' he might have become another Albert Einstein."
In my (admittedly limited) experience, most rich girls are naive and oblivious to their daddy and husband's wicked ways. They may be spoiled and self-absorbed, but generally they're not the ones making the decisions that keep the rest of society down. It's not their place to get their hands dirty, and get themselves mired in corruption. Rich men want to keep their daughters and wives as 'feminine' and thus as sheltered as possible, although it is indeed possible that a rich man will avenge his daughter should her hubby play away (however, it's unlikely that the order will come directly from his precious and pure daughter).
And before anyone accuses me of sexism, the point is, I'm saying that the rich *men* are the baddies here. The rich women are rarely the truly evil ones.
I'm a huge Cameron stan, and I recently saw this at the cinema, since I had to watch it on IMAX. Suffice to say, I loved it (even though I don't think it's quite on par with the first Avatar movie, mainly because it's lost the novelty value or 'wow' factor, for the most part).
That said, Aliens, and maybe Terminator, apart, I wouldn't say that Cameron was a 'genius' writer. All of his plots are fairly basic, although, to his credit, he does occasionally find some nuances in the characterisations. His skill is as one of the greatest filmmakers of the last 40 years. The visuals in a Cameron film, including, not just the special effects and stunts, but the editing (which is, for me, one of the key components of his success, as it should be with any action film director), cinematography, production design and general world building, are all second to none. And despite his on-set reputation, he is a good director of actors, which is where I think any depth and poignancy found in his films, often derive from. You believe his characters because you believe their emotions.
If anything, having a gay couple at the heart of this film makes it more interesting to me.
From the synopsis, supposedly one of the three characters has to be sacrificed to save the world. There's little chance that a child would be sacrificed, and it stands to reason that the 'man of the house' would also feel obliged to stand up for his wife.
But in a dynamic featuring two men, it becomes more complicated, and our sympathies are less obvious. It's no longer a simple case of 'women and children first'.
Anyway, I've ignored the homophobia behind your post, and instead given a pragmatic reason why a gay couple is actually to the film's narrative benefit.
Late response, but Halle had a short 'Paige Boy' cut in Strictly Business, 'Living Dolls' and The Flintstones, where she was arguably at her very hottest, and yet she looked much sexier in those films. In Boomerang she looked great (it's impossible for her not to look great), but it was more of a 'girl next door' type of beauty than a supermodel, va-va-voom type beauty, as per The Flintstones.
As an aside, I was probably too harsh on Robin Givens to begin with, although I still think Halle is hotter.
Creepy or not, Grace Jones is one of the coolest and most iconic people to ever walk this earth, and I think there's a fair case to be made for Eartha Kitt too. I just particularly like Grace Jones' music and overall style.
Hey, do you remember me?
I used to post here a good few years ago (before I left, of my own volition, in a huff). I also remember howos.
I would never cheat on anyone. Period. That's why I decried the hypothetical cheater and his mistress in this scenario, but the reasons 'not to cheat' are simply because it's wrong to cheat. It's an act of betrayal and cruelty.
The issue isn't 'what if I get caught, and my wife decides to murder me?'
Besides which, as an observation, it's not the blameless, non-cheating wife I'd worry about if I were the guy, but the immoral, selfish, entitled mistress. Also, the rich girl never had to fight for anything in her life. Even if she's corrupt, she's still unlikely to possess the tenacity and the guile to commit, or plan to commit, a murder. The woman who fought tooth-and-nail to get where she is, she's the one to keep an eye on.
I honestly can't believe what I'm reading! It's frankly sickening and disturbing.
Who puts a child in a CAGE with steel bars? And how can anyone possibly defend throwing a child, a baby even, into a stream/sewer?
Do you honestly believe the hateful nonsense you're typing here?
A child was almost murdered for being deformed/disabled!
And if you believe he was already evil, you're as bad as his parents, for associating innate evil with physical deformity/disability.
Suffice to say, *a child that age* shouldn't be treated like a monster.
Pretty much.
I wouldn't have minded so much if they hadn't cast such an obviously white, classically pretty, woman to play the 'poor, oppressed immigrant', and maybe cast a Mestizo actor, or someone who actually looked ethnic, but, alas, Hollywood for all its faux-liberal BS, still clings to this reactionary and moronic idea that an individual has to look like a WASP, or be a WASP, in order to merit sympathy (hence why so many gentile actors are cast as persecuted Jews, and why the 'White Saviour' genre is so dominant; after all, we can't have a Black character/actor or a Jewish character/actor at the core of a film about slavery or The Holocaust, can we?)
And, fwiw, I'm half-Portuguese, so my ancestry is quite similar to the 100% Spanish and white Ana de Armas's (heck my mother even has the same first name), but the part-Jewish Jamie Lee Curtis is the one member of the main cast who belongs to a *genuinely* oppressed minority (and, yet, she's cast as one of the xenophobic 'villains'... *eye-roll*).
As for the 'propaganda', I'm a staunch leftist, but I also hate being preached to. If Rian Johnson was a better, more subtle, filmmaker, I wouldn't mind, or if he were making a genuinely political film like the brilliant 'Bob Roberts' (which is egregiously leftist and nakedly political, but actually funny and perceptive, and works because it's not trying to be 'sly' and force politics into a genre where it isn't welcome), rather than unsubtly trying to shoehorn his politics into genre movies, I'd also be onboard.
Why do you assume the rich girl's the murderous type?
She's not the one having an affair, so I doubt she's the one inclined towards evil behaviour. That would be the cheating parvenu and his bit-on-the-side.
Rich women are usually better-looking (anyone who doesn't think that beauty is often bought, is lying to themselves), and they don't come with all the baggage and misery associated with a 'hard life'.
Of course, the problem is, rich girls are rarely interested in poor boys (although the converse is often true). Poor boys are usually demonised by society and regarded by women as a 'threat' or a 'danger'. Also, women are conditioned by society to marry men who will 'protect them financially'.
But none of my posts are offensive.
This is a really frustrating and not terribly user-friendly system as far as 'moderation' goes.
Ah, okay. Thanks. I think that makes sense.
What's the window between posts?
Honestly? He looked like a college-age man/early 20s to me.
"and I believe he only kidnaps Chip (Max's grownup son) who was probably older than my dad at the time of the movie lol."
Andrew Bryniarski was only 22/23 when he filmed this movie.
I don't believe people are just 'born evil'. Oswald probably grabbed for the cat because he was kept in a freaking cage.
It's a good theory, although I'm sure you'll get a lot of self-righteous criticism for it.
I think the ending is the best part of this beautiful movie. Hanks sacrifices his soul to preserve his son's. It's a very Catholic movie (I don't know if Sam Mendes, who I know is part-Jewish, was raised as a Catholic, but it definititely has that vibe, and even as an atheist/lapsed Catholic, the film still spoke to me because although I don't personally believe in God and damnation, I understand people who do).
I never watched it, but in hindsight, I like that it promoted a more 'wholesome' sexiness (or at least the earlier seasons did) than porn.
Believe it or not, not every guy is into porn. Some of us appreciate classically beautiful women (and men) without seeing them being demeaned and (literally) stripped of their dignity (not that I would ever judge a porn actor's choices).
From what I gather, later seasons dropped any pretence at story and characterisation, and became a revolving door of Playboy models to essentially flaunt their bodies, but it seems like the first few seasons genuinely balanced a semi-credible depiction of lifeguards with the more egregious eye-candy element, and the stunningly beautiful Erika Eleniak (for my money, the best-looking woman who appeared on that show) seemed to have an *actual* character to work with, befitting of a classically beautiful woman who also had a semi-decent film career (e.g. E.T., Under Siege, The Beverly Hillbillies and A Pyromaniac's Love Story, including many films that *didn't* require her to strip off her top), and was a proper actor and not simply a glamour model.