Nan's baby - Circle of Friends (1995) Discussion

[–] leeny994 19 years ago

Nan was going to England to go to school for fashion. She had already miscarried the baby when she fell through the door.

reply

[–] Jen175 19 years ago

ah, I see. Thanks for that. Either I nodded off or they didn't include that in the version I saw (I think it would be the latter, as I was enjoying the movie... although I was quite tired.)

reply

[–] wickedmaiden13-1 18 years ago

It wasn't explained in the movie. It was assumed by what was happening in her leaving scene in the movie that she had changed her mind about the abortion becasue the truth had come out and she looked like a home-wrecking, ho-bag

reply

[–] Harlequin06 17 years ago

I read the book first and in it it clearly explains that Nan miscarried after losing so much blood and nearly dying. And then she headed off to London to start a new life, away from all the people whose lives she ruined.

Don't know why they couldn't have just mentioned in the movie that she'd lost the baby.

reply

[–] jrangers19 17 years ago

I agree. I thought perhaps she was going to the abortion after all. It wasn't made quite clear.

reply

[–] stevenackerman69 11 years ago

She did not. Unless that is in the book. It doesn't really show that in the film.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

That's not clear from the movie.

reply

[–] Cloudburst2000 16 years ago

Well, in the book, she has a miscarriage due to the blood loss. However, that is not the case in the movie, as far as we know. Back then it was common for young unwed pregnant women to be sent away to have the baby. It was a way to 'hide' the woman until she delivered the baby...even though everyone knew why the woman was sent away. It was the whole 'out of sight, out of mind' style of thinking. This was the impression I got from the movie. I don't think she went to get an abortion since she was so religiously opposed to it. I think she was being sent away, possibly by her parents, until she delivered the baby...and maybe gave it up for adoption.

reply

[–] guikrazy 16 years ago

That was the assumption I made, based on the movie.

reply

[–] tonya_ringle 16 years ago

It was common for unwed, pregnant Irish girls to be shipped off to England to have their babies.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pinkpouncer 16 years ago

While the book goes in to more detail I felt the movie was leading the viewer to assume she had decided to get the abortion after all. From the impression the movie gave England was much more lax about certain rules (Jack wanted to buy condoms while in England because they were available there). I have read the book, but I don't feel the movie was trying to give the same impression.....it was so different in many other areas so I don't see they would remain consistent with the book in this one!

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] whitespirit26 15 years ago

Of course Nan wasn't getting an abortion; that would have been a horrid, wasteful and silly thing for the movie to imply. Nan left to have her baby and start a new life; no one "sent" her, as it was obvious she took control of matters. The movie never said she miscarried, so the assumption is that she left to have it.

reply

[–] asdf189756 11 years ago

she said "its nothing to do with you anymore" as she left, so there was still a baby but we don't know what happened to it

reply

[–] Virginiana 9 years ago

"It's nothing to do with you anymore" could also mean that Nan is acknowledging that the baby wasn't Jack's, but Simon's.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Exactly.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Agreed.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] stevenackerman69 11 years ago

I think they leave it open if I'm not mistaken. That's what they said on the wikipedia plot of this film.

reply