After Rob Roy chokes Archibald with the rope on the bridge an escapes, Archibald is shown sitting back at the estate looking at a picture of someone in a small locket. Who is depicted in the picture?
share
I'm not sure it's made explicit in the film, but I always assumed Archie's mother was some relative of Montrose, and that's why he took Archie in (bastard though he was) and took the locket from Archie's body at the end with such a furtive look.
Do others agree?
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
I'm not sure it's made explicit in the film, but I always assumed Archie's mother was some relative of Montrose, and that's why he took Archie in (bastard though he was) and took the locket from Archie's body at the end with such a furtive look.
Do others agree?
That's possible.
I think it's also possible -- though, here again, it's not made explicit in the film -- that Montrose was the "young buck she never saw who raised her skirts at a masked ball" and was Archie's father.
----
Lazy + smart = efficient.
I think it's also possible -- though, here again, it's not made explicit in the film -- that Montrose was the "young buck she never saw who raised her skirts at a masked ball" and was Archie's father.
The piece was actually a portrait of a person painted on ivory. It was and is called a minerature [sp] There were no Camera's or photos. If you wanted a picture to carry around, you had one painted. They were popular but expensive tokens of sentiment, As was surmised earlier this was Archies' mother and Montrose's Sister. Early in the movie Montrose berates Archy about his wasteful spending and tells him he owes him nothing. Even tho we would consider him Montrose's nephew. Being a Bastard Archy was entitled to nothing of the family Estate. Laws of Inheritance at this time were very stringent and bastards were not recognized as heirs unless they were recognized legally and publicly.
Hope this clears up some questions.
The piece was actually a portrait of a person painted on ivory. It was and is called a minerature [sp]
As was surmised earlier this was Archies' mother and Montrose's Sister. ... Hope this clears up some questions.
If it was some trinket Archie stole off someone else, or acquired it by some other means, he wouldn't have taken it out and looked at it as if it meant something to him, nor would Montrose have bothered to pick it up. It was definitely a portrait of someone close to him, most likely his mother. I would guess the same thing and say Montrose was somehow related to Archie. He wouldn't have just taken in a random bastard and let him get away with the crap Archie got away with. Montrose pretty much called Archie out on stealing the money even, but did nothing to punish him for it.
I see the body's a beast, and I am the rider. And wither the beast goes, so shall I.
If it was some trinket Archie stole off someone else, or acquired it by some other means, he wouldn't have taken it out and looked at it as if it meant something to him
Good point, it is all speculation. But seeing as how the movie does not make this point clear, I choose to believe the most logical explanation. The locket was a painting of Archie's mother, and Montrose is somehow related to Archie. Without anyone knowing the truth, it's all up to the viewer to make up his or her own mind about it. Either way, it doesn't really matter since this film is not about Montrose and Archie's possible relation, or about Archie's issues with his mother.
I see the body's a beast, and I am the rider. And wither the beast goes, so shall I.
Well, being picky, it's also opinion as to which is the most "logical" explanation. And I disagree with you at least in your last point: this movie *is* about those things, though they're obviously not its primary focus; without those undercurrents, Archie wouldn't have done what he did and we wouldn't have had a plot.
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
I appreciate your opinion, but I respectfully disagree. While it does have some importance to who Archie is, the movie never clarifies, and does not delve too deeply into Archie's past. Therefore, it is not about those things when considering the scope of the film, and we have no way of knowing that Archie wouldn't be the way he is regardless of whatever the truth of his past is, some people are just bad and Archie was certainly a sociopath. Really, since the film does not bother to explain it, it's all speculation. But it's a rather small back story for his character in the movie since it never is focused on too deeply. And yes, it is only my opinion that my take on the Archie storyline is the most logical explanation, but I have yet to see any other explanation given that makes more sense. Regardless, it doesn't really matter, because it's just anybody's guess. No one can say for certain, and I don't claim to be right. Again, just my opinion.
I see the body's a beast, and I am the rider. And wither the beast goes, so shall I.
Archibald is very important to the whole story, He is the counterpoint "no honor" to Rob Roy's "honor above all else". His background and actions are as important as Roy's to the story. They are both extremely capable men, but think about how differently they were raised, how family was there for them-or not, and how honor, and lack of it, was taught to them.
(PS -I feel it is also very clear that locket is a painting of his mother,and the social pain of his illegitimacy tortures him into being a monster)
Well, accepting that we're all speculating here, I think it could have meant something to him even if it was a woman he didn't know. The point of the locket, I think - whether it's his real mother or what he sees as an idealised image of one - is that the locket represents the part of life that Archie has missed and clearly longs for, giving the lie to his protestations of indifference to love and human caring. It's interesting that Montrose picked it up, but it's also possible we're reading too much into his motives.
I think it's also possible -- though, here again, it's not made explicit in the film -- that Montrose was the "young buck she never saw who raised her skirts at a masked ball" and was Archie's father.I too subscribe to the father/bastard theory. Though the relationship was never made explicit, i.e. 'this is my nephew,' there was something going on. Archibald was given much latitude, much more latitude than anyone else would have afforded, The fact that it was not explicit leads me to suspect that it was illicit. Someone in the Montrose's position could not have publicly recognized a bastard son. Anyone else, nephew, cousin, son of a close family friend, would have been less of a problem. The fact that the Montrose had to interrupt the servants who were already beginning to strip the corpse of valuables so he could claim the locket is evidence of some clandestine relationship, unknown (at least overtly) to even his employees. If it was a mere nephew, why keep it secret? The first question anyone would have with someone granted such access to someone of the Montrose's stature would be, 'who is he?' The fact that he bothered to claim the locket is enough to convince me that he was the 'young buck.'
Hope this clears up some questions.
It really doesn't, unless you can offer some evidence that the woman in the portrait really is supposed to be Montrose's sister. Otherwise that's just one possibility among others and your answer is speculative -- which, as puirt-a-beul says, is fine as far as it goes, but ultimately the fact is that we don't know.
----
Lazy + smart = efficient.
When Montrose takes the locket after the finale, I took it as an acknowledgement that he was secretly Archibald's father and took him in for that reason.
shareI believe that the film implies that Archibald is Montrose's illegitamite son. Do you guys remember when we first meet Archibald? Montrose introduces him to Guthrie and the other nobleman, and the other nobleman responds "one of your likely lads?" I always assumed "likely lads" meant "possible offspring".
Also...why would Archibald's mother send him to live with some stranger? Especially in the hope that said stranger would "cure" her son's ills?
"I snort. I drink I kill. I am not a kid-I am a man."
Exactly! I felt that it was explicit in this, Montrose was Archibald’s father. He may not have been certain that Archibald was his son but he had had an instinctual suspicion at the very least.
And without a doubt he has balled Archibald’s mother numerous times.
I always assumed it was an old flame of Archie's, perhaps the only girl he ever really loved (being that the picture is of a younger looking attractive woman), and Archie doesn't seem the sentimental type that would wear a locket with a picture of his mother.
I just re-watched it, and in a scene with him and Betty the housemaid, Betty is examining the picture while Archie is talking about his mother and potential fathers. This leads me to believe that it is indeed a picture of his mother. As to whether the picture is of Montrose's sister, I doubt it. It doesn't fit in with the narrative. As an earlier poster pointed out, Argyll asks Montrose if Archie is another of his "likely lads".
This space intentionally left blank
It's strongly implied that Archibald's mum, the woman inside the locket, was Montrose's former lover and therefore Archie is Montrose bastard son
shareIt's his mother. He told that to Killrean close to the beginning of the movie.
share[deleted]
It's his mother. He told that to [Killearn] close to the beginning of the movie.
He did? When?
----
Lazy + smart = efficient.
Sorry. When Archibald is with Betty, just before Killearn comes with the 'evil plan', she's holding the locket (close up in detail of the locket) and Archibald says: "My mother could come no nearer than three candidates for my paternity". With this, I think, is being suggested that the woman in the locket is his mother.
shareYes, I remember that scene and I agree that that's the suggestion/implication. I just didn't recall that Archie ever told Killearn who the woman was (I've seen this movie many, many times) and I couldn't find any reference to it in an online transcript). Thanks for clearing that up.
----
Lazy + smart = efficient.
My guess his mother too. That is the only thing that makes sense to me.
Big Movie & TV Show Fan http://www.bestflixmovies.com/
" Archibald says: "My mother could come no nearer than three candidates for my paternity"."
That begs the question: Unless Archie exaggerates here, how could Montrose be sure that he was the father?
_______
"The best kind of fairytale is one where you believe the people" -Irvin Kershner
That begs the question: Unless Archie exaggerates here, how could Montrose be sure that he was the father?
"Then you have the nature of this man here."
Seriously, Montrose can't be absolutely certain. But when an apple is so close to a tree, there's good reason to believe that's where it fell from.
(Besides, we don't know what Cunningham tells Montrose; all we know is what he tells Betty. To Montrose himself, he may not mention the other two candidates.)
----
Lazy + smart = efficient.
They make it quite clear the woman in the picture is Archie's mom, in the bedroom scene. As for who is Archie's father, I'm of the opinion it is Montrose. When people make films, especially high budget ones like this, every scrap of dialogue and every scene has a very specific purpose. It was very deliberate how Archie described the mystery man who impregnated his mother. And even more deliberate how Montrose bends down and takes the photo at the end. Also Montrose goes into a rage about Archie sleeping with the help (not wanting Archie to make the same mistake he did I guess).
share
I agree with this. I think it's very strongly implied that John Hurt is Tim Roth's Dad. (so to speak).
But the fact that it wasn't stated clearly in the script is deliberate. A good film doesnt need to spell everything out in precise detail. Life, after all, isn't always like that. I suspect if any of the film-makers were to read this thread they would be quietly satisfied at evidence of a job well done. :)
_____________
"Maybe I should go alone"
- Quint, Jaws.
It makes the most sense. It also makes things more interesting. And, it might explain why Hurt's character was lenient with Archie, despite the fact Archie had caused him so many serious headaches. Too bad someone involved wouldn't come settle it once and for all. They love to see people debate over their material though so they never provide any answers.
share