Why does no one get that Phil is sleeping with Larry's wife? - The Big Kahuna (2000) Discussion

[–] chencho 17 years ago

I´ve just reseen this movie. If you think that´s Larry´s wife calling (at 2:00am or so to the business room????) BECAUSE that´s proof of Phil having an affair with her... well, I do believe you have a right to believe so. Just dont seem so surprized no one else does. Your words. I agree with the Larry calling to say "I love you" to Phil, and to apologize with Bob.
Larry has been gone for more than 10 minutes -the time it takes for Phil to enlighten (at least try) Bob to what character means. Hardly that would be a valid "you just missed him".
Phil fantasizes with suicide for his own marital and life problems. Of course, its just my opinion.
Almost every spin one takes about undisclosed information is a valid one. But I sincerely doubt that the director/writer/actors were trying to soap opera this fine movie.

reply

[–] michaelparks11 17 years ago

I agree with pretty much everyone else that it’s a big stretch to say its Larry's wife on the phone. I mean she is mentioned so briefly and never heard or seen so why would it be her? It seems pretty clear that it’s Larry calling to apologize to Bob and he clearly tells Phil he loves him which came up earlier in the film. Larry left the room first and Bob left after Phil’s speech to him which was about 5 to 10 minutes long in which Phil’s tries to explain what character is. He tries to show Bob he is not better than Larry and that they are both flawed. Larry has a different take on the world because he has been around and has character while Bob is just getting exposed to the world and doesn’t regret anything yet. So it seems to me that Larry called to apologize and Bob had just left. Phil and Larry are to close of friends to have this problem between them and the fact Phil doesn’t seem to be that kind of a guy. Phil's depression is caused by him not being satisfied with where his life is and reflecting on that. At the end of the film Bob and Larry exchange looks at each other to further show that Larry and Bob understand each other and have come to terms with each other and their differences. Which shows to me that Larry wanted to apologize to Bob for the argument they had. I agree with the original poster in that the film is more about man’s flawed existence in the face of God.

reply

[–] neil_mc 17 years ago

LOL you were so sure of yourself as well Capt Thorpe, putting this across as fact when it's such a ridiculous theory.

Not surprised you scuttled off after posting it.

"Please don't eat me! I have a wife and kids. Eat them!"

reply

[–] rabbits888 17 years ago

LOL you were so sure of yourself as well Capt Thorpe, putting this across as fact when it's such a ridiculous theory.

Not surprised you scuttled off after posting it.

LOL

Juliet Stoker: You look pale.
Mort: Yeah, thank you.

reply

[–] NYgirly 17 years ago

Did you listen to a word of Phil's monologue to Bob? Phil talks about character and, specifically, Larry's character (and no, he doesn't say Larry is without flaw or imperfection). It wouldn't make any sense for Phil to wax poetic about character, something he (Phil) has obviously reflected on and specifically observed in and valued about Larry over the many years of their friendship and meanwhile be cheating on him (Larry) with his (Larry's) wife. His depression more likely stems from his failed marriage that he perhaps contributed to--think about Larry's comment that HE has never cheated on his wife--and misses (at least what marriage can represent outwardly). Character isn't simply about 'good' or 'bad' acts either, rather, it's more about the depth of a person and more so than intellectual depth alone.

______________________
Wait, what? What?!!

reply

[–] CheeryToes 17 years ago

Larry said that Phil used to be UP one minute and DOWN the next...(as in bipolar) that's why he asks him if he's on drugs. He also mentions that he always thought Phil might kill himself. Phil has always had emotional issues, so he isn't depressed because he's having an affair with the wife of a man he loves and admires.

It WAS Larry saying I love you and Phil's "I love you, too" is sort of an acknowledgement of what he already knew, that Larry loved him, too.

That's the CEO of the company sitting there talking to Bob in the morning, so in my mind, that's Bob's apology and recognition that some of what Phil said to him is true, if it isn't natural, if you don't care about the person, it's all marketing.

Anyhow - I don't know how that first poster could have come out of left field with that idea, but I think he is dead wrong. This was a great movie I enjoyed it A LOT!

"Anybody want a peanut?"

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 16 years ago

Larry was talking to Phil, who wanted to talk to bob now that he was back in his own room, regretting hitting him. He then took the opportunity to tell larry he loved him because larry asked him before and he didn't give the answer he felt he should have to a good friend.

Duh.

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 16 years ago

That's an assumption. The audience doesn't know the identity of the person on the other end of the phone. We assume it is Larry (Kevin Spacey) because of the prior conversation. However, Why would Larry call to talk to Bob? He already said his peace before leaving the room. And, Why does Phil sound so affectionate when saying "I love you too".

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 16 years ago

It makes as much sense to say it is a Roswell scientist who's having an affair with Phil. There is no reason, no hint of any kind to point us in any direction that says there was an affair.

We know Phil is all emotional because he's going through some sort of identity crisis and that's why he asked Larry if he loved him. When Larry called back, it was because he had NOT finished saying his peace. In a good story, characters make changes. Larry realized he was too hard on Bob and wanted to tell him so. He also realized that he should have told Phil he did love him when he was asked, so he took the opportunity to make that right, and it apparently worked, because Phil looked genuinely appreciative.

Of course, that's the assumption. It could have been a gay stripper who was in love with Phil and also wanted to kill Bob. Phil knew this and was telling the gay stripper he just left, so the killer/stripper could gi find him. When we see Bob in the morning, we realize that the gay stripper/killer IS the Big Kahuna himself. Larry smiles because he knows Bob will soon be dead...

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 16 years ago

Maybe Larry's wife is a gay stripper/Roswell scientist and falls for Phil because he is really a transexual floozy from the planet Zorg ... and the Big Kahuna is actually the name of his wang.

There is no evidence of an affair, however there are several clues. Phil's sudden lifestyle changes are telltale. He has recently stopped drinking. He is about to quit his job and cut professional ties with Larry. And, he gives Bob the spiel about how a man doesn't know himself until he looks into the eyes of the woman he (stutters) is married to. The theory of the affair is a study of Phil's attitudes; the way he acts towards Bob, towards Larry, his excitements, and his miseries. We see all these different sides of Phil, and it ultimately seems like something is eating him. And that something seems to affect him most when he is alone with Larry.

I think the point of the "mysterious" phone call is how our assumptions can limit our perspective, but that if we open our minds and look at the larger picture, anything is possible.

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 16 years ago

None of those are clues to Larry having an affair. The phone call was not intended for that. You can open your mind all you want, but I can make the same argument about the color of the wallpaper being a clue to the impending zombie invasion.

He is quitting, and as much of a friend he is of Larry, he's not going to see him much if he leaves this job. I just left a job myself, and I don't see the friends I have all that much since I left. It's a matter of physics. Nothing about his relationship with his wife says anything other than they are getting a divorce, and since he hates his job and his wife is leaving him, he's got nothing left. Doing so makes him question his whole existence, thus the "Do you love me" and "you never know a man" talk.

If you got anything about an affair between Larry and Phil's wife, you're reading deeper than the writer intended. There just isn't anything there.

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 16 years ago

I think all the dialogue about fidelity exists for more reasons than to simply draw a moral or theological line in the sand between Bob and Larry. Even though Phil defends Larry in that final scene, Phil still has a lot of misgivings about Larry's behavior. That's why Phil is constantly stifling Larry's rants with "Jeez Larry", "C'mon Larry", etc. Phil basically pulls rank on Bob for professional reasons. They gave Bob a job to do, and he blew it. So Phil took on the responsibility of putting the kid in his place. However, on a personal level, Phil is constantly taking Bob's side throughout the story.

Now, take that dynamic, and assume what a relationship between Phil and Larry's wife would be. Larry is insensitive, boisterous, fairly mean spirited at times ... a salesman. Phil is introspective, thoughtful, and compassionate. I've seen friends connect with their best friends' wives, and this is a formula for an affair.

The clue that really seals the deal for me on the affair theory ... and it is only suspect, with no real trace of evidence, which is the beauty of the story ... is Phil's candor when he says "I love you, too". It's familiar, like something he has said to the person on the phone before. I believe THAT is the reason for the "Do you love me?" talk with Larry (in so far as the story is concerned) to establish this is not something these two friends have ever said to one another. So, when we hear Phil say it without surprise, like it's second nature, we can infer he is not talking to Larry.

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 16 years ago

Yes, the real beauty of the story, the way you can infer the ufo angle without any solid evidence or even hint of it. By coming up with ideas that were not even remotely near the authors thoughts, that's something. When an author writes a piece, say, about the horse hair worm, and I can tell without there being even the slightest hint of a clue, that he's really speaking about the CIA tapping my phone, or feeding me the names of the bus drivers that hate me, that's the real beauty of the story. An author has to have real skill to tell me things that he isn't even thinking or intending to tell me.

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 16 years ago

Are you the author? Have you had a candid talk with the author, or the director for that matter, about what the precise meaning of the story was? Art is an interactive medium. Interpretation of the abstract is what gives art life. And when there is a portrayal of a phone call, one which we the audience cannot see, nor hear the person on the other end of the line, it IS an abstract concept. I realize you are safe in your assumption of what the audience is led to believe. So be safe. Trying to nullify my interpretation of the film isn't going to make your views stronger. It just makes you seem somewhat arrogant. Time to just take your shrimp-the-size-of-watermelons rantings to the 15th floor. And, make sure you wear the right name tag.

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 16 years ago

I guess I do sound arrogant, and my view could not be any stronger, so no point in me trying. It can, however, be more clear and less abrasive, so I'll try that.

I feel that reading so deep as to change the very basis of the movie means you missed the point. It's not so impossible a notion. In this case a cigar is just a cigar, and I am not of the opinion if you can imagine it and there is nothing to the contrary, then it is probable. They never claimed to be on earth, but I feel pretty strongly that the author did not mean for us to wonder about the abstract nature of the galactic location simply by leaving it to interpretation.

Since we've established that there is no hard evidence of an affair, much less an affair with Larry, the entire argument for such an idea now hinges on the phone call. If there was such an affair going on, consider the following:

-Phil's marraige is breaking up because of an affair- do they exchange I Love You's on the phone? No. Not if he's borderline suicidal

-Phil's marraige is breaking up because of an affair with larry and phils wife. If he knows, does he remain that civil to larry? NO. If he does not know, but knows there is an affair, does his wife call late at night and immediately want to speak to Larry? No.

-Larry is banging Phil's wife. Does Phil then go on to Bob about what a great guy Larry is? NO

-Larry is banging Phil's wife. Does he give a speech about how he noticed that suddenly Phil is not himself, that something is changed, or does he not go there because he knows he's banging phils wife? Larry is a sales guy, but the movie portrays him as decent. It doesn't fit that he'd go on to Bob about how Phil's not the same if he knows it is because he's banging Phil's wife.

The point is, the whole concept falls apart if you apply does he know to the "clues" collectively. If he knows, the movie would not have progressed as it would have, and if he did not, most if not all of the clues would be negated.

Lastly, this art form of art is not interactive. You sit and watch what someone else has brodcast to you with no feedback mechinism. Just because you can get the wrong impression or can talk about it online does not make a movie interactive. The closest you might come to an interactive moment on TV would be maybe the end of the Sopranos, where you are intentionally left to make an assumption of what happens next. But that isn't always the case. Just because some information is not fed to us does not always mean the director, author, whoever, is trying to force us to make up back stories. I know I sounded arrogant, but I'm trying to reel it in here. My point is quite valid even if I can be a bit of the top.

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 16 years ago

You are missing the point. Read the thread title again. No one is saying Larry (Kevin Spacey) had an affair with Phil's wife. The theory is that Phil (Danny DeVito) is having an affair with Larry's wife.

And, Why does everyone assume that Phil is suicidal? We see a fantasy of him jumping off a balcony. That doesn't prove he is suicidal. He is also wearing silk pajamas and smoking a stogey. Perhaps he is romanticizing his own death, but I think it is more a representation that he would rather jump off a balcony than be at a sales convention. I mean, no one thinks that Bob is seriously considering being a bartender. It's simply where he sees himself within the framework of the party. The way I interpret Phil's fantasy, it merely means he hates everything about his job: the convention, the locale, the suits, the cigarettes, and the people. If he was borderline suicidal, Why would he quit drinking? People later in life generally quit drinking for one of two reasons: 1) health reasons; 2) at the request of a loved one. Why would someone who is suicidal care about quitting drinking?

There are ways to read into a story. UFO theories and whatnot don't belong in this story, because the themes are not relevant. Marriage and fidelity are introduced as central themes. Why is that? Is it simply to paint a divisive picture of Bob and Larry? There is more going on than just the facts at play in this story. Hence, the reason Bob is so steadfast in seeing outside the box of being a lube rep. The ultimate moral of the story is: Life's what you make it. I think it isn't a far stretch to believe the film makers designed the story to exercise that moral....

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 16 years ago

I don't see how you can dismiss Phil's suicide fantasy and see an affair that just isn't there. I won't be able to convince you of that because as you've said in other posts, you like to imagine different stories every time you see the movie and you somehow think it is the film that is to blame/thank, but the affair simply wasn't there. Sorry. So in answer to the original question, that's why no one sees it.

The mere mention of fidelity does not mean Phil is screwing Larry's wife, and the phone call by any other person's evaluation was just what it appeared to be, Phil and Larry talking. I agree that movies can leave some things up to interpretation, but they rarely intend to allow the viewer to rewrite their own back story, and this isn't one of them. A good friend of mine is fond of saying that you are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts, and I think that applies here.

On the upside, you have a great imagination. It must be wonderful to play Star Wars Episode IV five times a week on your DVD and actually see everything from West Side Story to The Wiz just by reading between the lines.

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 16 years ago

I find it difficult to honor someone's film critiques when they refer to Star Wars as Star Wars Episode IV. Is there even any singing in Star Wars? There is singing in Return Of The Jedi.

Just to be clear, I didn't start this thread, and am not wondering why no one gets that Phil is sleeping with Larry's wife. I know why. People want to see the best in people, and moreso, in movie hereos. Audiences are prone to herofy Larry and Phil because of the actors who portray them. The audience sees a very introspective, but limited 18-hour window of these characters' lives. We see enough though to know how seedy these guys are, especially Larry. He all but admits he is a whore for the company. These characters may be portrayed as good guys, but they are far from good men. And I believe the film makers' intentions were to leave precisely how swarthy they are to the audience's imaginations.

And, it wasn't a mere mention of fidelity. It was a reoccuring and prevelant theme of the film.

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 16 years ago

Ok, agree to disagree.

reply

[–] wrg6 15 years ago

....but can somebody please tell me why Larry's wife would be calling the hospitality suite at what must be well past 2 am? Why would she not call call the room of the person she wants to talk to? She obviously was not desperate to talk to someone since she gets off the phone too easily, so chances are she didn't go through the process of hunting him down to the suite (no conversation means no pay-off for her troubles. Unless she wanted to talk to Larry, but then why would she say "I love you?" to Phil?)- You would think if they are having an affair, there would be some indication on his face or his speech or body language, but he takes the call as if he was expecting it (or at least its not a surprise). Also, assuming there is an affair and they have not spoken all night because Phil and Larry have been together- the conversation would probably have been a little different. The line "you just missed him" would be a cue to both of them they can talk freely- instead that line ends the conversation and they sign off. Not to mention that "I love you" fits perfectly into the earlier conversation between Phil and Larry.
Just one more opinion to add to the mix.
I think its probable that our responses say more about who we are than about the characters we are discussing. As someone else said, we all look at things differently through our own filters.

reply

[–] greeneyedredhead 15 years ago

ChuckTaylor is also CaptThorpe and he's posting cos everyone was laughing at his riduculous "affair" post. Pathetic!

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 15 years ago

No, ChuckTaylor is just ChuckTaylor. I think it's cool interpretation. I see why you would think that, with the 'C'/'T' thing going on, but I assure you, that is just a coincidence.

reply

[–] Kurios 15 years ago

During the the phone call, watch the expression on Phil's face (DeVito is such a great actor the expression was notable) it was certainly Larry on the phone, not Larry's wife) Phil saying it was Bob that just left. Also remember the conversation between Larry and Phil before talking about the (friend's) love they and for each other. NO if Phil was sleeping with Larry's wife, this would have been a completely different film.

"It doesn't mean that much to me to mean that much to you." -Neil Young

reply

[–] bunnywithanaxe 15 years ago

Amen, Kurios, Amen, amen , amen.

reply

[–] ChuckTaylor 15 years ago

The problem with your argument is this ... it is not "certainly" Larry on the phone. One must "believe" it is Larry on the phone. There isn't enough information to be certain of the identity of the caller. This is consistent with the themes of the story: physical vs. spiritual; material vs. divine; wits vs. wisdom; etc.

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 15 years ago

Christ, are you still arguing this point? The whole theory is a fantasy. Your willingness to not give in and use metaphysical gymnastics to avoid being proven wrong are hardly evidence.

But maybe I'm missing the point. Perhaps this is just your thing. This is what you do in life. You hang around on the BIg Khahuna board and out the non-existent relationship between Phil and Larry's wife. If you're happy, good for you.

reply

[–] domhowe 15 years ago

Just saw this movie again today and had already read these chains.

Captain Thorpe and Ms Lisa, please rewatch and rethink. Your conclusion is a sadly cynical one to arrive at, after all the excellently written discussions about relationships throughout the whole movie. And Devito is too good an actor to play that as talking to a lover. He's talking to Larry! It's the follow up to Spacey's earlier comments about love.

To think otherwise seems to put slime in a movie that is about so many other facets of life.

But I do agree with Thorpe: great film, great play, great work!

reply

[–] BruklinBridge 15 years ago

Of course he was talking to Larry. Some people think that if you can imagine something and there is no way to prove it wrong, it is possible and the director/writer/whoever intended it.

reply

[–] hodie 14 years ago

Because he's not sleeping with Larry's wife.

Honour thy parents. They were hip to the groove too once you know.

reply