MovieChat Forums > Dancer in the Dark (2000) Discussion > Selma is a murderer with a low IQ, I fee...

Selma is a murderer with a low IQ, I feel sorry for her orphan

posted 13 years ago by nickymelnar
41 replies | jump to latest

In this movie we watch as a mother is brave enough to sacrifice herself so that her child never becomes blind...

Or, we watch a woman with serious mental problems, low IQ, unbelievably bad mother, and of course a murderer of another person who has his own mental problems.

Why do I speak so harsly?

1) Most horrible mother I ve seen on screen:
She prefers the kid never find out the truth about his probable blindness because if he does learn that, he will be sad, thus worsening his condition. While hiding the truth , she condemns herself to death...

She prefers raising him without ever being there for him (you see, acting classes are so much interesting, and its better leaving him to her neighbors).

She never gives him any kind of presents and would rather he thought all his own money and his mother's , went to a non-existing grandfather.

SHE PREFERS HE BECOMES AN ORPHAN AND KNOWS HIS MOTHER AS A SENTENCED TO DEATH BRUTALL KILLER/LIAR, rather than just learn

he may be getting blind at some point in his life but his mother has all the money ready for a successful operation which will save his eyesight.

What a good and brave mother, lying to the court and hiding the fact her son is getting blind, thus condemning her self to death... If she had told the truth, her son would hear about it and he would become sad!!! No , we dont want that!!!
Better we get him to an orphanage scarred for life!!! That wouldn't make him sad at all!!!

(Also: in the question "why did you have your son, even though you knew he would eventually become blind? " she answered "I wanted to hold a baby in my arms" Nothing about giving him the chance to live... No comment)

2) She is so moral, hiding the truth about her neighbors condition even though she is accused of nearly raping him/stealing from him/killing him.

She is such a Christian, keeping her promises, that when he asked her to kill him she does so with 34 freaking hits. Such a good friend indeed!!!

THE GUY HAS PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEMS, GET HIM TO SEE A PSYCHOLOGIST, DONT KILL HIM IN A VULNERABLE STATE OF MIND!!!

------------------------------------------------------------
There are many many things I could point out to show this woman DESERVED THE WORST OF THE PUNISHMENTS IMAGINABLE , as she killed a human being. (I never agree with the death sentence, I believe its a far worse punishment to keep someone in jail all their life).

The poor kid grew up with a retarded woman who left him an orphan ALL ALONE IN THE WORLD "to protect his happiness and eyesight."

There were so many alternative choices, the obvious one being she told the truth from the start to the wife, so she d never end up killing him... In the end, even if noone believed they were her money, she could work and gather the money once more... After all , her son wouldnt be getting blind any time soon (she started when she was about 30 years old) and he would grow up with a mother truly protecting him...

I cant believe how horrible this plot is, how horrible the "songs" were, the camera, everything. The only thing I liked were Bjorks acting. Nothing else...

[–] patatoflouda 8 years ago

Actually, it is true! Critic reviews say that both Selma and Jeff are "simpleminded".
Simpleminded means retarded. That's why see did all thit choices. She couldn't think different. Even if it wasn't written, it was so obvious.
It is an experimental artistic movie. Not for everyone. Most of the commenters love this movie and can't judge objectively. This is a common phenomenon at this kind of movies. You ignore the fact she is simpleminded and explain with no sense why she isn't or why that doesn't matter. I can't understand why some people are so offensive with that. Do you love so much Bjork that you don't want even in movie to be retarded?
I think this movie was not at all about plot. As a viewer that I don't like Musical and Motion Picture I expected more from plot. I've been told this is a heartbreaking film. I found only the final scene good, interesting and realistic strong. Except the answer that explains the OP's questions, it was very slow for me and I found some scenes and other parts of the plot very bad(court). Bjork was good at acting I liked it too.

[–] elise-tomlinson 8 years ago

I've enjoyed low-brow movies (Day After Tomorrow, 2012, Dawn of the Dead remake) for what they are...it doesn't make me an intellectual snob for appreciating this unique film for what it is, a touching tale about what a mother is willing to sacrifice for the love of her child. I feel sorry for reviewers who lack the empathy or compassion to appreciate the nearly impossible decisions this woman had to make to save her son.

1. Selma moved to America with the sole purpose of earning money for her son's operation. With inflation, $2,000 back in the early 60s would be worth around $16,000 today. At the time Bill took her money, Selma had already lost her factory job and was fully blind. At that point in time, there was *no way* she would have been able to earn the money again.

2. She may have been a little simpleminded or uneducated, that is not the same thing as being "retarded" (which is a *highly* offensive/derogatory term by the way) often used to describe people with Down's Syndrome. I would describe her more as naive...and stubbornly self-sacrificing.

3. When she kills Bill, it's because he won't let her have the money back unless she does. He holds onto it with all his might...forcing her to do it. I agree she shouldn't have, but she knew if she didn't get the money back, her son's surgery would not happen.

4. She couldn't use the money to pay for a lawyer (or anything else) because the police did not know that she had the money. She used it immediately to pay the eye doctor under an assumed name. If anyone discovered that she used the money to pay the eye doctor, they would have demanded the doctor refund the money and give it to Bill's wife.

5. In the beginning (before Bill took her money) she didn't want her son to know about his impending blindness because she didn't want him to be sad (and make his condition worse) which seems reasonable. That isn't why she wouldn't mention in court that she was saving for the eye doctor (or why she continued to claim her earnings went to her overseas father). Again, if the police knew about the need for the operation, they would have taken the money back from the eye doctor and given it to Bill's wife. She couldn't say anything to jeopardize the operation.

6. She seemed to feel that it would be easier for her son to hate her and think she was a terrible mother and a murderer, than to let him know that she sacrificed herself for him. I agree, knowing that your mother sacrificed her life for your own would be a pretty heavy burden to bear.

Anyway, just the simple fact that this film creates such strong feelings (positive or negative) in folks, and that people who watched it cared enough to come here and debate it after the fact...shows it has more value than a lot of the mindless crap that gets produced these days.

[–] j-m-d-b 8 years ago

I am not going to respond to the OP in detail. I disagree with most things in that post but that's fine, we all have different taste or views so there is no need to agree all the time.

I will say this though: Stories about people who do the 'right' thing and always choose the 'correct' path are booooring. Life is messed up, people are very messed up, and films like this one are about exploring the human condition. That is my opinion.

[–] tematy 8 years ago

I think she used it as an excuse to finally end her misery. "I've seen it all". She had enough of this life, she just wanted it to end.

[–] AP (5259) 5 years ago

A lot of people have already responded to the points here except for one: she was not guilty of murder. Her neighbour put the gun against her and as she struggled, it went off.