SPOILERS
If the roles were reversed, I would feel the same way. If you think I'm going to give women special treatment simply because they're women, you are sadly mistaken. Yes, I realize the law states that killing or injuring someone is against the law except in self-defense (or to prevent death or injury to someone else). In the play version, he was blinded. In the movie version, it was left up in the air whether he went blind. As far as spraying the bug spray in his eyes, she had every right to. If she hadn't, he probably would have raped her and killed her (as he later admitted that was his intention). Once he was caged, it would have been taking the law into her own hands if she killed him because she was in no immediate danger at that point. The roommates didn't automatically side with her. Here are a few things that happened at different points in the film: Patty tried to block Marjorie from killing him. Terry said, "I don't know what happened here, but I'm not committing complicity for you." "I'm not gonna go to prison for you, so please. Just let Pat apply some medicine."
Farrah initially tried to go to the police after she tied him up, but he yelled out and described how she couldn't prove a thing. She was worried the police would let him go and he would come back and kill her. So she felt she was in a kill or be killed situation. That's why it's called Extremities: One extreme action leads to another, and another, with a terrible snowball effect. Once Marjorie got a confession from him in front of Patty and Terry, and he said the full names of other victims, she had enough proof that the police wouldn't let him go so easily.
reply
share
SimplemindedSociety
12 years ago
'Once Marjorie got a confession from him in front of Patty and Terry, and he said the full names of other victims, she had enough proof that the police wouldn't let him go so easily'.
---------------------------
But the roomates under oath would have to confess that the confession was made under Coercion. Even if he didn't confess, don't you think the police would had given her the benefit of the doubt?
I don't know why they changed him being blinded for the film,unless if he was blind, then he couldn't really seek vengence,which throws everything off-balance.
'Farrah initially tried to go to the police after she tied him up, but he yelled out and described how she couldn't prove a thing. She was worried the police would let him go and he would come back and kill her'.
----------------------
That was her assumption.
People in Marjorie's place should not make decisions in the heat of the moment. What would the police claim,that he came by for no reason and she decided to go homicidal? The polce would not naturally figure that there has to be some good reason for him to be locked in a fireplace behind a headboard?
This is why women buy guns, in case anybody comes by to harm them.
reply
share
timothy-5
12 years ago
I saw both the play and the movie. I'd say only about 20-30% of the script from the play made it into the movie. It's not like some movies whose scripts are practically identical to the play version. West Side Story: None of the script was changed for the film; though some songs were sung at different points than in the play. The remake of Psycho had a script practically identical to the original film, except about Lila working at "Hypervinyl Records". I digress though...
The point of film is how one extreme action (an extremity) can trigger another after another...
As far as women buying guns, you can't just buy one and automatically be a sharpshooter. You have to practice like crazy at a firing range to be sure you can handle it properly. Men buy guns for protection - not just women, and of course men also need to practice like crazy at a firing range.
This film is among my favorites - I can't tell if you liked it from what you're saying. At least Marjorie came to her senses and didn't kill him.
reply
share
SimplemindedSociety
12 years ago
'This film is among my favorites - I can't tell if you liked it from what you're saying. At least Marjorie came to her senses and didn't kill him'.
-------------------
Yes, it was certainly entertaining; I stated the weaknesses of the film on another thread, particlarly when the 2 roomates come home,and that it's too bad the film was a dissapointment for all concerned.(the reviews were not good)
If only 30% of the play made to the film,what is the point? Was the play more talky,and not enough action for a film? Usually, there is a reason for changing it,aside from opening it up to avoid staginess.
reply
share
timothy-5
12 years ago
When the roommates came home, it got very talky and boring. You have to have some "sit and talk" or "stand and talk" scenes to move the plot along, but if it's too many, it becomes a bore. Like "Eat, Pray, Love" - she just sits and talks at a table the whole movie through and nothing really happens in it. Anyway, the play took place entirely at Marjorie's house - no set changes. The parking lot scene and car escape took the staginess away and added some action. Also, it makes it a new experience for people who've seen the play - it's not a complete retread. I saw the play second and because many of the lines were different, it wasn't a retread.
reply
share