Inspector Goole not Poole (Major Spoiler)
Calling the Inspector Poole takes away the whole impact of the inspectors name. When you find out that the inspector is only just a ghost, a fiction then Goole is appropriate.
ANYWAY GREAT FILM
I don't think that the inspector was a ghost, he was more of a state of consciousness or a preminition of what was about to happen.
shareHIS NAME IS INSPECTOR GOOLE!
shareNo it's Not Goole it's POOLE! Get a copy of the film and watch the distinct pronunciation by Alastair Sim. I have a copy and he, the daughter's fiancé, as well as a police officer ALL pronounce the name POOLE.
shareGet a copy of the play, you idiot, the film was not first.
It's GOOLE. G double-O-L-E.
Just because you feel the need to resort to name-calling, which is very immature and quite rude, doesn't make you right. I have a copy of both the play and the movie and they are different. The name was changed, in the movie, to POOLE. Your nasty, negative posting is unnecessary and doesn't prove any point that you may want to make, except that you are a nasty and uneducated oaf.
shareWhat I am trying to get across is that the movie, whilst having changed it, was wrong to change it, and it SHOULD be GOOLE. Otherwise the ending makes less sense than it should.
On the subject of name-calling, calling me a 'nasty and uneducated oaf' is hypocritical. You've just called ME a name.
I am sorry about my previous post, though, I'm not too sure why I posted such a stupid comment ... o_O I was probably just annoyed at nothing in particular ...
I was simply defending myself and was not being at all hypocritical. I did not call you a name by referring to the comment you made as nasty, because it was. I did not call you a name by describing you as an uneducated oaf, which is how you came off by making such a comment. I would accept your apology for the comment if you were to sincerely submit one.
shareOh, and on the subject of Poole versus Goole I strongly disagree. Goole, as meant to signify ghoul, is transparently heavy-handed and not in keeping with the benevolent motives and demeanor the Inspector displays. The way in which Alastair Sim depicted the character bore no relation to the evil undead. I think of the Inspector as either an angelic messenger of God or God himself on a mission to teach compassion and offer redemption to the thoughtless members of that family... It's probably why the name was changed for the film.
shareI don't feel myself that Goole means anything of the evil undead. I think it is merely another name for ghost, spirit, or things of that sort.
And I am sorry for my other post - I seriously do not know why I posted it. Like I have already said, I feel I was probably just ticked off in general, and I had no reason to call you an idiot, or whatever I called you. I hope you accept my apology - seeing as how I'm not too good with apologies anyway and merely tend to repeat my point. Then again, I usually repeat my point in anything I say and do. :/
I accept your apology, however, as far as the Goole vs. Poole issue goes, the encyclopedia describes a ghoul as an evil entity: "It lures unwary travelers into the desert wastes to slay and devour them. The creature also preys on young children, robs graves, and eats the dead." So apparently you're unaware of the definition of a ghoul. I still firmly believe that Alastair Sim's exceptional performance had nothing of the macabre about it and he played the role as a benevolent purveyor of reason and compassion. That sort of caring spirit cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered a ghoul...
shareThat's also how I see the inspector.
share