They both have better lives when seperated! - The Family Man (2000) Discussion

[–] shouvley 14 years ago

Jack tried to get a better job but he and Kate decided it wasn't a good idea since they would have to move away from their family and uproot their children. They were happy where they were and didn't want to risk changing anything.

I'm sure no one would argue with having both love and money, but when Jack and Kate are "successful" they are also alone. Neither is in a relationship, nor do they have friends or close family to spend the holidays with. Instead of viewing as love vs. money, look at it as being surrounded by people you love vs. being alone. I think that was more the point than the money aspect of it.

Also, being a pro bono lawyer is not a "dead-end job" just because you don't get rich doing it.

reply

[–] EluriaSK 12 years ago

After rewatching The Family Man I couldn't stop thinking how egoistic Kate reacted when Jack wanted to move into the city. The whole family could have had a better life and the kids would be able to go to good schools and later good colleges.

The Intouchables / May 25, 2012 / Do yourself a favor and watch it

reply

[–] Livana_Faolan 11 years ago

You missed the point, obviously. Kate was worried about taking Annie out of the school she was attending, because it was a school that she (Annie) happened to love.

reply

[–] mickey123mouse123 11 years ago

But she was obviously not worried that Annie probably would have a worse life if they stayed. Annie could've go to a private school as Jack too said. That would've been better for Annies future.

reply

[–] Eve_of_Destruction 10 years ago

I agree.

_________________
Yes I'm with him. I'm uh...I'm Mrs. Igles...I'm Mrs. Iglesias

reply

[–] the_la_baker 9 years ago

But she was obviously not worried that Annie probably would have a worse life if they stayed. Annie could've go to a private school as Jack too said. That would've been better for Annies future.

The truth in your statement is apparent, and that scene is SO accurate to real life. I personally know 2 married men who got 6-7 figure salary job offers they turned down because their wife was worried about moving. One was at Rockstar in Southern California, the other was at Google HQ.

Women need to ditch the emotions and start using logic and reason.

reply

[–] mephis5 9 years ago

Let me get this straight, the husband tells his wife, he'll make 2x his salary plus bonus, and live in a luxury apartment, and his wife tells him no, because their 4yo daughter loves her school?!!

In what world would this ever happen? Yes honey, let's stay in our crappy little house in suburbia instead of me making 6 figures and living in a huge apartment in the city while the kids go to a Montessori school that costs 30k per year?!!

If anything his wife would be the one nagging him to get a better job. What world do these writers live in!!!

reply

[–] freebird1987 7 years ago

I know, right?

reply

[–] jschott65 9 years ago

She was egotistical, not egotistic.

reply

[–] roofall 11 years ago

by
shouvley

Also, being a pro bono lawyer is not a "dead-end job" just because you don't get rich doing it.

This just caught my eye; It's a little far fetched to say that in a decade+ since this movie was made, things have gotten *a lot* worse - concerning money - like as if the world revolved around it (judging by OP's post); but, it is a downward slope nevertheless. Great movie, just ran on tv, loved seeing it again.

99% of new films are garbage

reply

[–] bobsdesigns 10 years ago

There have been 2 recessions since the movie was made. Money is fresh in everyone's mind now. Everyone is sick of working so hard to get it. When they see someone like Jack with an easy win ticket, most people would expect he should take it.

reply

[–] SaidNDone 9 years ago

except he clearly wasn't bothered by not having a family at the start of the film, he loved how his life turned out - not everyone needs family or people they are close to and he was one of those people

reply

[–] Kawada_Kira 12 years ago

You know, money isn't the only form of "success".

Sig under construction

reply

[–] cliff_niblr031 12 years ago

Kawada Shogo wrote - You know, money isn't the only form of "success".

Yeah, and neither is having a wife and kids and being unable to support them.

Why is it either or with people like you? Do you automatically see someone with "money" or "success" as being evil? Do you automatically see someone with a family as being inherently "saintly" or more upstanding as an individual?

reply

[–] katesgram2000 12 years ago

But like 3 Dog Night said "1 is the loneliest number"

He was supporting his wife and kids just fine. She did mention the kids even had college funds.

There is definitely more to life than money- if money was the big thing we would never see millionaires committing suicide.

He was going from one loveless one night stand to another and while the sex might have been good- even great-he found out it was even better when you love the person you are with.

He also fell head over heels for the kids. Yes kids can be a royal pain but they can also make you feel a love like you have never felt for ANYONE.

reply

[–] cliff_niblr031 12 years ago

"But like 3 Dog Night said "1 is the loneliest number"

Okay, what does quoting a song lyric have to do with this movie? And as far as "1 being the loneliest number", that depends on your point of view. I know people (as I'm sure other people do too) that there are people who can be lonely even amongst a crowd. Then there are people who know have to have fun all on their own without other people around to distract them. Some people call these things a vacation. Others call them hobbies.

"He was supporting his wife and kids just fine. She did mention the kids even had college funds."

And there's a difference between "just fine" and being satisfied with the knowledge that you know you CAN'T do better, and someone who has real talent and skill at his job (like Jack) who is able to earn a bigger paycheck. And he seemed REALLY happy when he did exactly that.

"There is definitely more to life than money"

Of course there is. I never said it wasn't.

"if money was the big thing we would never see millionaires committing suicide."

If that's your ONLY arguement about money doesn't bring you happiness then WHY are thousands of teens (who are not rich) and others attempting and succeeding in suicide? You need to do better than that.

"He was going from one loveless one night stand to another and while the sex might have been good- even great"

And your problem with this is...?

"he found out it was even better when you love the person you are with."

Oh... is that why so many couples cheat on their spouses? And, correct me if I'm wrong, Jack almost cheated on his "wife" until he was talked out of it. Whether or not he should have gone through with it is another discussion.

"He also fell head over heels for the kids. Yes kids can be a royal pain but they can also make you feel a love like you have never felt for ANYONE."

You mean like how a lonely teenage girl who so desperately wants to be needed and loved deliberately goes out and has unprotected sex just so she can get pregnant? And if a person doesn't want kids they're what? Evil? Selfish? Lonely? Suicidal?
Again, this is exactly WHY this film and your points are such b.s.

Are there people who are happy with a spouse and kids? Sure. But should that lifestyle be forced on everybody?

What about people who are just as happy, if not more so, with a good career that they enjoy doing, hanging out with friends who stimulate them with their intelligence and wit, and being able to do things on their own simply because they have no one they have to report back to... like a spouse?

One of the great things about being single is that if a person wants to take a trip somewhere (to another country or whatever) they can make arrangements pretty easily. (That's of course if they have the time and money to take a vacation.)

If a married person were to try that you first have to discuss it with your spouse, schedule it so that BOTH of you have time to take vacation, decide together where to go (which can become another problem), and it MUST be kid friendly which cuts out many really fun places and activities adults like to do, and you have to budget yourself very carefully. Can it still be done. Sure. But it kinda defeats the purpose of going away on vacation if you still have any lingering family squabbles that you WILL BE taking with you on your trip.

reply

[–] FallenAngel25 12 years ago

ok. im sorry. i have to ask:
....how old are you, are you married/in a relationship and do you have any kids?
please don't get defensive, i found your reply interesting, and i'm just curious.

reply

[–] cliff_niblr031 12 years ago

"how old are you"

Over 21.

"are you married/in a relationship"

Not married yet, but in a long term and stable (so far) relationship.

"do you have any kids?"

None that I am aware of.

reply

[–] Gimplet 11 years ago

Cynics beware, Idealist posting:

A defensive posture against this movie is unfounded. Love and Companionship are cherish-able. You either believe this or you do not. Jack was content without it, Agreed. But who turns down enriching oneself but a fool. This is what I took away from this movie. Not love vs money. Jack was given an opportunity to taste Love and companionship, and he liked it. The movie implies no where that successful careers (money) are against Love and Companionship. Its reasonable to assume they will financially do fine together as a couple. What is refreshing is witnessing love bloom from a sincere heart.

My 2 cents.

reply

[–] sporty_1 11 years ago

Your 2 cents are spot on! IMO; Thanks.

reply

[–] roofall 11 years ago

Blah, this is my 100th post in this thread. ;-$

But who turns down enriching oneself but a fool.

.. A quote from a recent True Blood episode (Rutger Hauer):

"Uneasy rests the head that wears a crown"

99% of new films are garbage

reply

[–] roofall 11 years ago

by
cliff_niblr031

"do you have any kids?"

None that I am aware of.

Good one, lolz. Oh and about everything else: people can choose to be happy with what they've got (also :)).

99% of new films are garbage

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] roofall 11 years ago

+1

99% of new films are garbage

reply

[–] dikran-kayfian-216-385914 12 years ago

Absolutely agree with that. When they were together, they were constantly tired, trying to push through. And every time he strived for something better, she kept pushing him back out of nostalgia.
I understand the premise of the movie, but it was poorly executed.

reply

[–] straw_hat_boy_luffy 11 years ago

I don't think they had better lives. Jack had a lot of money and stuff and none of that made him happy. Kate seemed content enough, but going off of a few minutes of screentime doesn't really give a good picture. She seemed to be kind of empty too.

Sure, in the "alternate" life, they both work harder and are perhaps a lot less rich, they seemed a lot happier to me too. Jack's misery mostly came from his attachments to the past. Once he came to actually let go of that, he didn't want to go back.

Some ask why he couldn't have both. And well, who says he didn't have both in the alternate? It seems like he and his family lived quite comfortably and he had a reasonably well-paying and stable job. She did what she really wanted to do, not for financial necessity but because she wanted to. Yeah, they had a stressful life, but they seemed to be genuinely happy when they let themselves be, as opposed to the empty "I have money, yay me" attitude Jack has as the corporate head.

maybe I suspect, so many have a problem with the movie's portrayal because they are content as Jack in the beginning.

__
Writing is my favorite hobby. Writing something that many can enjoy is my favorite dream.

reply

[–] bobsdesigns 10 years ago

I've lived both lives so this movie completely hit home. I can tell you the non-lonely married with children life is much more fulfilling.
Remember the life with Kate was a glimpse, it was not his real future. In the non-glimpse life, Jack and Kate are both wealthy, they can do whatever their hearts desire.

reply

[–] mariondowning-427-469344 10 years ago

That's what I got from it. He and she were both starting out rich anyway at the end (when their new life began), so no doubt their kids would have been fine financially when they got older and neither of them would be struggling anyway doing what they wanted.

My problem with the film is that Hollywood doesn't think people can be happy, have morals, be rich and not want to get married and have kids (rich unmarried people are always unhappy bed hoppers in their films). They seem to be big on advertising marriage and children as the only acceptable ideal- as if they are trying to convince people to reproduce so they can have a future audience for more films like this that are just copies of other films anyway.

reply

[–] threeeschs 11 years ago

Well, to answer your question "Why not have both?" I would say this:

In order to have the type of success Jack portrays at the beginning of the movie, you have to sacrifice elsewhere. Remember, Jack wasn't just rich, he was SUPER RICH! I think the term is married to your job. In his reality, his life COULD be ordered like this (if he wanted a family):

1) Job
2) Family

The glimpse told him that life could also be structured like this:

1) Family
2) Job

That's why he walks away from the business deal at the end. His priorities have shifted. You can't be that welathy and not put Job first.

reply

[–] ralpmg 11 years ago

Of course he could of been richer but like the person who wrote above me . In order to as rich as Jack you had to give up something . Like he said at the end they could both live separate lives and do fine but he would rather live what he had in the dream

reply

[–] cliff_niblr031 11 years ago

Agree with the arguement that in order for Jack to be as successful as he was presented in the begining of the film he had to be "married to his job."

You can't be that successful in any field without sacrificing some portion of your life somewhere else be it certain relationships or whatever.

I think what really irks me about this film, and they even make mention of it when Jack confront Don Cheadle's character, is when Jack says something to the effect of "so you ruined my life just because of what I said about being happy?" Meaning, when Don's character asked Jack what does he want and Jack said "I have everything I need." Then Don's character said "Remember Jack that you did this to yourself."

Whaaaa?

How does Jack saying that he didn't want anything from anybody makes him deserving of being "punished?"

I understand that the film needed jack's character to go through the "It's a Wonderful Life" bullspit. I just think they could have handled it in a better way.

reply

[–] roofall 11 years ago

My 101-st post in this thread (think I may need rest, lol), w00t! ;-P

Ok, so you've just pointed out the whole point of this movie, perhaps; Not sure what the exact line was, found two versions of it:

"Well, everybody needs something." @ http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/f/family-man-script-transcript-cage.html

&&

"Everyone needs something." @ http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/familyman.html

.. what better way is there?

;-)
:-)

99% of new films are garbage

reply

[–] lincolns_knight 11 years ago

"You can't be that welathy and not put Job first. "

Really? How do you explain Bill Gates and Warren Buffet then? Two of the richest men on the planet and both devoted family men.

reply

[–] cliff_niblr031 11 years ago

I'm so very glad you brought those two up as examples.

Both of them were driven to succeed as younger men which enabled them to make their fortunes. hence, not much of a relationship as younger guys.

It was only AFTER they had achieved success that they THEN decided the time was right to pursue relatioship(s) which they did and they eventually settled down and got married AFTER they were ALREADY successful.

Other examples:

Mark Zuckerberg - married AFTER he was already an established billionaire.

Douchebag.. er, sorry, Donald Trump - married AFTER he established himself, then re-married since he couldn't stay faithful, so his 1st wife dumped him and took half his money.

Oprah - is she even married to Steadman or is she still jerking him around..?

And I'm sure if you do some research yourself you will also see many other examples of people (whether in film, sports, business) who married or got more serious into relationships AFTER making their career a priority.

reply

[–] scootergirl9988 8 years ago

You can't use Gates or Buffet as examples as they are wildly successful entrepreneurs who are in the vast minority (and, BTW, didn't become family men until after they were successful).

Most people who want to succeed at their careers are employees, not entrepreneurs, and to become wealthy in those careers they have to work 60+ hours a week and show that nothing comes before the company. Not holidays, not vacations, not family. Anything less and you're going to be forever stuck in the middle class, not that there's anything wrong with that but it certainly isn't wealthy. No employee has ever gotten rich working forty hours a week unless it was through stock options they held onto for fifty years.

"Nothing is more ill bred than trying to steal the affections of someone else's dog."

reply

[–] RadioTherapy 10 years ago

I always thought that the reason Jack couldn't get a better job is shown through the Allen character - Jack's Wall Street coworker. You can just see the guy is spent trying to juggle a high profile career and his family, thinking about his kids, especially when he says, "It's Christmas Eve, Jack." My dad was nowhere near the league of the guys in the movie, but he's a successful contractor, and I frequently recall coming in second place to his business throughout my childhood. Most days I only saw him briefly in the morning then fell asleep before he came home at night. He was always blowing off promises to do something or take me somewhere or see me in my school play, and it wasn't because he didn't want to, this was just the era of his business peaking so that took priority. I don't resent him at all for it, but I do wonder how I would've turned out if I had a more "involved" father during my formative years. Yes, Annie would have had plenty of material opportunities like private schools or nicer clothes, but she wouldn't have had the same dad.

reply

[–] stefan-79-235442 9 years ago

The alternative live was because eDs heartattack. But Jack wasnt happy, had almost an affair, With help of Wallstreet Jack he went to Wallstreet anyway

reply

[–] jschott65 9 years ago

Together they were a loving family, making ends meet with a little extra, but happy and fulfilled nonetheless. Separately, they were single and in love with themselves, period. Sure, they each had a lot of money, but had no substance. You for sure missed the point of the movie, which is kind of a shame.

reply

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]