the scene where the mother promised to not harm the daughter as long as the daughter told the truth about the whole pretending-to-be-blind thing, only to haul off and smack the kid when she acknowledged what she'd done, gives the viewer a glimpse of what kind of mother she was, and why the girl was so down in the dumps.
another good example *might* be the fact that the parents called the daughter's school to say she was sick and wouldn't be attending that day, cancelled their newspaper subscription (hopefully!), destroyed all their earthly possessions, murdered the daughter and then killed themselves. in other words, the daughter probably wasn't going to place in any "who has the best genes ever?" competition.
the girl wanted to please her mother: she never argued when her mother said no (ex. leaving the light on after the daughter was in bed), she said what she figured her mother wanted to hear (ex. her response to the mother's question about feeling alone) and she comforted her mother when the roles should've been reversed (ex. putting her arms around her mother when the daughter was in bed). she was trying to get her mother's approval, but she didn't know how (ex. the above-referenced conversation about being blind; doing what you're told and then getting punished for it, despite the promise that no punishment would be issued).
so the girl went along with what her mother told her to do. like any other kid that age, she believed her parents were doing what was best for her.
it's obvious the daughter had no idea what the heck was going on. even if you take out the commonsense argument that no one that young could understand what was happening, this point was still explicitly evidenced by the daughter's reaction to the smashing of the fish tank.
for me, the most chilling part of the film was the father rationalizing why it made sense to include the daughter. he was so far gone mentally that he was able to convince himself that the kid knew what was going on, and that she actually said she wanted to be a part of it.
i don't think the parents ever truly considered allowing her to live.
reply
share
deRider84
12 years ago
I think you're absolutely right about what was intended, but it could have been presented in a slightly more elegant manner. It would have been easier to swallow, as well as much more powerful, if the girl was a bit more normal at the start and a whole lot more confused at the end.
The parents were hardly great role models, but they did treat her with affection and care. I saw no real justification in the film for the child to behave so strangely and be so pathologically withdrawn. And while the slap incident wasn't an example of great parenting, it's simply too minor to be seen as a sign of terrible upbriging. I'm sure my parents did exactly the same thing to get the truth out of me at times, but I still managed to turn out ok.
As for confusion, the child doesn't even blink when the parents start smashing up the house (fish tank being the notable exception). I'd imagine most children would be very scared to see their parents behaving so oddly no matter what they're told. Eva seems more or less serene throughout it all.
But whatever, I guess it's a minor gripe now that I've had the time to think about it a bit more.
reply
share
karaladh
10 years ago
" it could have been presented in a slightly more elegant manner. "
The film isn't elegant. It isn't a Paul Thomas Anderson film, the child's inner feelings wouldn't fit in with the cold, inhumane atmosphere of the film. The part where she cries because her father just smashed the fish tank suffices to show that while she's led by her parents into a terrible path which she's too young to really understand, she's truly still clinging to life. Well done enough for me.
The room's a wreck, but her napkin is folded.
reply
share