what do others think about this one. Could it not be that the baby had some medical internal problems. if so why make it look as though the father had done it. incest with an 18 year old girl that is your own daughter is very wrong but having sex with a small baby is something else!
shareYou don't honestly think the father started with Jess when she was 18, do you? Obviously he's been doing this since she was a little girl, possibly even when she was a baby. If that's the case, he's going to start again with the new baby the same way he started with Jess.
share[deleted]
I don't think so - a lot of incest starts at the time a girl reaches puberty (11-12), or the dad could have started when the mother was pregnant (and in theory wasn't being satisfied by her). I think it would have been obvious if the baby's injuries were caused by sexual abuse, but then again I don't really know.
I think the point was, even if there was a slight chance that the Dad was hurting the baby, that the possibility was too much for Tom and reason enough to tell. I'm 90% thinking it wasn't the Dad, but that 10% chance that a father was raping his baby is definitely 10% too much.
OMG - I think the father did sexually molest the baby! Tom even says to his mother in the hospital - when the baby has blood coming out of either her vagina or rectum - that she shouldn't, "...trust him around the baby."
This may be the most vile film I have ever seen. Just horribly disturbing.
"Yeah, they're dead - they're all messed up" NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD
actually, a lot of incest ends when a girl reaches puberty.
that's why they're paedophiles.
and why she was getting it up the bum - and why the dad was berating her comments near the end - because he took the pains to not allow her to get pregnant.
what a swell guy.
Sukioki is exactly right. Most incest begins before the boy or girl has reached puberty, typically around the age of 5 or 6.
I kind of wish that Tom hadn't stabbed the father but instead gone to the authorities with the photographs and the videotape evidence (which I think I can sort of understand why he threw it away after getting it), but Tom was obviously a pretty disturbed/confused/angry boy.
Does anyone have a guess as to how old Jessie was in this film? She was asking about going away to college - so maybe 17(?) or so?
"Yeah, they're dead - they're all messed up" NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD
under the bio for the girl who plays jessie, it says that she was 18 when she played a 17 yr. old. that's kind of disturbing in itself, those kind of scenes played out with understanding so young.
and for everyone who is incredulous about the baby, it happens. (usually digitally) Father O'Grady in "Deliver Us From Evil" did that. it's just a line that, once crossed, can always be shifted.
most kids will protect everyone else involved and not want to cause anyone else trauma and will therefore remain silent. most kids think they can handle things themselves - either by suffering or by murder. the authorities are an unfamiliar nightmare, and seen as an additional burden instead of relief.
i kind of wish it came out about the baby and jessie had stabbed the dad instead.
Clearly the bab y is bleeding rectaly :(
sharethough i know it happens, i can't wrap my head around it. raping an infant? it's not something i [or many other people] could "understand", but damnit, i just don't understand!
and i don't mean to sound like a tool, but wouldn't a child that small die from something like that? just in general. i'm not necessarily talking about the film here.
First, people, of COURSE the father had sexually assaulted the baby. The filmmakers couldn't have been more explicit on the point. Zombie, infants who are raped often do die. Othertimes they have extensive internal damage requiring reconstructive surgery but do manage to survive. I actually saw a photo of an infant after being raped and pretty much her insides were ripped out. That this actually happens is mind boggling, I know. I vividly remember the first time I read about such a case. I literally had reread the paragragraph a few times to fully absorb it because I couldn't believe what I was reading. And then I threw up.
He DID have sex with the baby, it is made very clear so just deal with it.
_______________________
"They're crabs, they're eating him... nature sucks."
the movie was made in 1999 she was born in 1980 she was 19 when she played jess
shareshe was supposed to be 17 but she was 19 in real life and he was supposed to be 15 and he was really 18
shareactually they never say he was putting it in her butt he could have just been doggy vaginal it was mostlikly anal but they dont say it is
share[deleted]
Tom says it to Jess when they are driving back from the hospital, "Do you only like it in the ass?"....and....Jess says it to her father as she and Tom are standing there, right before Tom stands there. "You *beep* me in the ass. It hurts. Why would you do that?"
shareincest and pedophilia are two different things. A guy fantasizing about (or taking action toward) *beep* an 18 year old, or even a 15 year old, is not necessarily a pedo.
One could be both incestuous and a pedophile but it doesn't have to be that way.
That was the impression that I got. I would have killed the sick SOB too.This was a very disturbing movie!!
sharebaby could of had tomato soup for dinner and had diarrhoea, or the baby could have kidney problems, you just can't jump to conclusions.
share"baby could of had tomato soup for dinner and had diarrhea"
Really? ,:-)
I mean, I'm not saying people should jump to conclusions. It could have been a small number of health issues, but I am pretty certain the tomato soup diarrhea is not one of them.... hehe...
I don't know if you've actually ever been around a baby, but diarrhea is generally not a reason to freak out and rush them to the hospital.
And that was undoubtedly blood.
Still, if the baby had been penetrated, I would have to the think the nurses/doctors would have realized this by observing the anus/rectum and would have questioned/notified the mother immediately.
But maybe the baby had not been fully examined yet...?
It's a mystery.
Yes, the father interfered with the baby. This is made obvious by the mother's immediately strong response to her son's vague few words. She realised it was him who hurt the baby and immediately prevented him from having access to her. She would not have acted like that from such a vague comment if the pieces had not fit.
shareI found this movie most disturbing and very slow. The actor who played the boy I looked up and he has not done much acting since nor has the girl. Colin Farrell and Tilda Swinton however have gone on to be major movie actors also Ray Winstone. It was not a pleasant movie to watch and I found parts of it disgusting. Why would Tim Roth want to tackle such an unpleasant subject as his debut as a director? I had no idea what it was going to be about when I watched it. I hope the baby was not interfered with.
shareA father sexually molesting his own baby to the point it is rushed to the hospital because it is bleeding, he should be killed, oh, wait- he was.
shareirismcmurrough,
of course its something else
there is a difference between pedophilia (sex with a minor -deals with age) and incest (sex with relative). Both are taboo issues.
the two combined is even more controversial.
the film clearly shows that the baby was being molested, (in real life there would be thorough examinations to prove so)...sadly this does happen, i've read numerous articles in newspapers about babies being sexually assaulted and i once spoke to a grandmother about her granddaughter being groomed by the father/step-father by using a thermometer...some people are too sick to even imagine what the hell they get up to, and i guess that can be seen as a mercy to some of us but it means the blinders are on and we can't see a truth when needed - this is why countless children are still abused when there are obvious tell-tale signs...we don't really want to see it...
shareI had that thought too when watching this but didn't really want to believe that a person could be capable of that, but obviously some people are. That is so beyond disgusting and horrific, I can't even fathom it.
One scene that really bugged me, even though pretty much nothing happens in it, is when the dad is holding the baby and kind of humming to it and stuff, and just knowing that he did the same thing with the daughter who he is raping when she was a baby...what kind of life would that baby have? Augh....it's just horrifying.
I think that's what the film is telling you, the baby was abused. I think the mother knew this when it was taken to hospital.
Also the shocked look on the face of the nurse shows it is something worse than a regular medical problem, don't forget an experienced nurse has seen many sick babies, and isn't going to shock easily.
[deleted]
Of course the baby was raped by the father. It is just too horrific to admit, but this is implied very clearly in the film. The baby is dripping blood anally, the nurse comes and looks at this and leaves the room horrified, then the doctor comes in very, very upset. Yes, people, this was a monster that not only raped his teenage daughter, but his baby daughter as well.
share