MovieChat Forums > Roxanne (1987) Discussion > Roxanne's intelligence

Roxanne's intelligence


She's supposed to be a 'rocket scientist', but people with that title actually invent, build, maintain, refine, launch and pinpoint trajectories of rockets to hit their targets in space.

Roxanne is a astronomer which can be confusing because they can also work at Nasa... but completely different job descriptions.

My beef is with the fact that it was CLEARLY CD's voice out the window that night and none of her delicate genius came into play? I know you can make the argument that she was being swept off her feet by prose that was pretty much designed to weaken her defenses, but how does that affect her ears? She even asked why his voice sounded different.

I love Steve! I also know that the whole rapture of his romanticism that he is gushing is supposed to suspend our belief that she would be swept away... but I just can't get past that she is smarter. than. that!

Sure, they cover it later in the film during the convo between CD and Rox and there is some explanation to it, but just kinda floppy all around, to me.



______________
There is nothing to see here

reply

Because love can make the smartest people stupid. In this case, the hope and promise of new love (Roxanne having been burned by her previous relationship) allowed her to overlook what objective observers (the audience) would notice right away. Happens all the time.

reply

This.

It's no different that the original story's suspension of disbelief required when the heroine patiently waits for the 30 second gaps between responding to her lover and awaiting his respond while a hushed muffled voice directly below her mumbles something.


::in the room with no doors, a faceless boy playing with makeup...
I love him from this mirror...::

reply

... Car 3, car3! Proceed to the 279 ...

😂

---
You got your mind right, Luke?

reply

Just because someone is book smart, doesn't mean they are street smart.

reply

I can attest to that.

reply

Amen to that

reply

Playmate of the year, 1985, right?

reply