The movie provided a decent plot based on two brothers in the slum of nyc. The younger brother just took the blame for a petty crime and stomached 6 years for his older brother... It's a dark film and perhaps some of you may complain that Buddy just focused on the negative side of the characters. Well that isn't correct, watch the ending, you will never forget it.
sharePetty crime? I wouldn't say so. Manslaughter, wasn't it?
What I liked about the ending is total absence of romance afterwards. That would have been too cliche.
I agree about the romance. Would have been cringe worthy. It was definitely Manslaughter. 5 years ago I must have been referring to Tim's actual involvement (breaking & entering) as opposed to what his brother did.
shareBut what happened to Lorraine/ did she die? It was never explained at the end.
shareI know its an old post but nah, Tim Roth walks by the house with the car on sale and the window, hears the radio playing like Lorraine always had it on, and smiles subtly.
shareVERY old post. Why would I be referring to that? Lol? Obviously meant the third act as a whole, the shooting sequence at the house.
shareI replied to Abbalish. Learn to decipher thread structure. You want to complain about old posts yet you come in almost 2 years later to reply to someone who wasn't even talking to you, way to go and make your point. By the way, 3rd act =/= ending. BIG difference.
shareYou don't need to explain structure to me and am not interested in reading it from someone who comes of as rude. And as I said, "as a whole."
shareOkay hypocrite, because this wasn't rude at all: "VERY old post. Why would I be referring to that? Lol? Obviously meant the third act as a whole, the shooting sequence at the house."
Especially when it was to the wrong person and obviously taken out of context because I didn't reply to you then. So yes, you don't understand thread structure because you thought I replied to you.
I see it isn't sinking in yet for you. Let me reiterate one more time. I replied to you as a mistake. If I replied to YOU that means I interpreted your post WRONG. If you can't get over that as I am, then you have several self esteem issues to work over. This is a movie website thread I remind you. I understand thread structure just fine. It takes a certain type of person to try and chew a person (they don't know) head's off for misinterpreting a post.
shareYou can interpret the radio turned on by the window Tim walks over to as Lorraine having made it back from the Hospital. The car was in the driveway.
Edit: @ Abbalish
I already answered this directly to him almost 2 years ago, the one which you thought was addressed to you. Welcome back to IMDb, going through your old post history and restarting threads unnecessarily or what?
shareSimmer down. I could do as I please. Just as you decided to post in this thread years after it's creation. I apologize if my response to something I just noticed was so life altering, that you had to race over on here. Get over yourself and move on.
shareI replied to another person. You replied to that reply years later and I answered right away because that's what an alert and a response dictates to a normal person. Unlike you, who waits for years, and replies to a person he thinks he's answering and goes off on his little rant. Making some more sense now d-bag?
shareYou're still going? I see how important this website is to you. Not everyone is glued to these forums as you are. Normal people have priorities. Seeing as how this is IMDB, I choose movies over talking to obnoxious people as yourself. I've been around all these years just never bothered to participate in threads. Interacting with you reminds why. If I responded the way I did it was an honest mistake. However, you're so immature as to blow the reply out of the water. Nice job at resulting to name-calling by the way. I'm glad you've used all these years of responding to alerts to hone your insults.
share[deleted]