Incest - L.I.E. (2002) Discussion

[–] shadow24 19 years ago

"Was the story told by that kid about banging his sister supposed to be a bit of comic relief?"

Yes, I think that was the intention. In reading an interview with the director, he said it was meant to show that they are just kids. He also said when he growing up there was a kid in his neighborhood tha used to brag about having sex with his sister. And finally, he said he included the scene to show the audience that Gary knew more about sex and was more experienced that the other kids.

reply

[–] ahcacao323 19 years ago

It's dark comedy; if you can't handle it....

On the other hand, I don't think it is only comedy. I think the director is trying to show the audience that sick things like this exists. Just like the pedophile is a charming guy who picks up your kid and takes them out in public, your bastard son who is always getting into trouble might be fuccing his sister. You can't say it's not realistic.

reply

[–] dugitebite 18 years ago

It really wasn't that far off the Cletis character in the Simpsons. LOL

From what I've been told sibling incest is far more common that most people think.

reply

[–] noveltylibrary 15 years ago

I thought his mother was creepier than him.

reply

[–] fl1 13 years ago

I think the director is trying to show the audience that sick things like this exists. Just like the pedophile is a charming guy who picks up your kid and takes them out in public, your bastard son who is always getting into trouble might be fuccing his sister.

I agree, and it's quite explicit when Brian (who for some reason always defends Howie) says Howie that he's doing gay things with Gary and he could try with girls instead, then he sees that Howie isn't very happy with this suggestion and he adds that after all it's not that bad, incest is worse (and it is indeed!).

reply

[–] quiet_movie_idiot 17 years ago

it was disgusting, but i kind of had the same reaction as howie, mainly awww, hah, that's grosse. and then the other guy's like, i wish i had a sister. just makes em look like idiots, and makes howie and gary seem a lot better.

reply

[–] JKneller 17 years ago

ok, I have a sister; and it's kinda distagusting, I would never have incest.
But the thing I love about this film is that it's not afraid to show (not literially) disturbing things what happen in real life.

reply

[–] Cameron_m 17 years ago

I agree.
This film just makes statements and doesn't care about your feelings. It has a really spooky honesty.

I really do enjoy this film. It makes me smile, laugh and send shivers up my spine.

reply

[–] JKneller 17 years ago

the best thing for a film!

reply

[–] Mister_Wonky 17 years ago

But would Luke Skywalker have gotten with Leia if it wasn't for Han? That is the real question!

reply

[–] ScorceseOnCoke 16 years ago

I think it was that kid bragging about having sexual expirience.

reply

[–] slipcat555 13 years ago

Despite all the hype, Star Wars is just mindless entertainment aimed at middle-school kids. The dialogue is atrocious and the acting isn't much better. L.I.E. is a sensitive, perceptive, artistic portrait of adolescent growing pains. If Howie were the type of kid who was satisfied with Star Wars and felt that it embodied his whole universe, he would not have merited his own movie.

reply

[–] psychoboysaz 16 years ago

On the DVD Special Features there's a deleted scene of Howie and the guys looking through the bedroom window watching their friend "doing" his sister. When the director previewed it, no one liked that scene. They would have rather believed the boy was lying. So would I.

reply

[–] phasmatrope 15 years ago

Yeah, the deleted scene--where the "sister" is shown to be fairly attractive, and watches them leave--doesn't add much, if anything, it kind of implies that she may have an interest in him. So as disturbing as this sounds, without that scene, you could almost interpret his comments--assuming he's NOT lying--that he's been forcing himself on his sister... which is a horrible thing, but even as fiction, MORE believable--and comprehensible--to me than the idea of 2 biological siblings having a mutual sexual relationship.

Granted, I'd really like to believe that she's just a step-sister--which is still wrong, but a bit less so--but in either case, it's a pretty repugnant situation to think about...

reply

[–] bing-57 15 years ago

> the idea of 2 biological siblings having a mutual sexual relationship.

What exactly is the problem with having relations with a sibling? Other than two-headed babies?

No matter how much you try you can't change who you are attracted to.

It is pretty common in the animal kingdom for siblings to mate. And in human terms, royalty did it all the time a few hundred years ago.

Granted, I'll concede the practical problems of sibling mating, but I really don't see why people claim to be outraged.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

reply

[–] Dr_Cosmo_McKinley 14 years ago

People are outraged because its wrong and disgusting.

Zydrate comes in a little glass vial, and the Zydrate goes into the gun like a battery....

reply

[–] bing-57 14 years ago

> People are outraged because its wrong and disgusting.

You are missing the point by a long shot. Your opinion is quite a bit short on actual reasons.

Can you tell me exactly what is wrong with sex between siblings? Why does it bother you if a brother and sister that you've never met have sex?

Why is sex between siblings any more disgusting than sex between strangers or sex between a married couple? Please explain the exact things you find disgusting.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

reply

[–] Dr_Cosmo_McKinley 14 years ago

Answer 1: You must be kidding right? It's immoral, disgusting, against every law of nature, man and God. And this is coming from a very liberal person.

Answer 2: Overall I would never agree with it, but if a brother and sister I've never met (therefore not knowing) were doing such a thing, I still agree its wrong and they should go straight to a doctor. I've heard rumblings about it being a psychological problem that can be dealt with.

Answer 3: Its disgusting because they are family members and they have the same DNA. Its the ultimate wrong barrier to cross with family. Sex between strangers, although something I dont agree with, is at least between two people who are not of the same family tree nor have the potential to create a family of genetically damaged children. Sex between a married couple is an form of pure, right love between two people who are of completely different families and backgrounds.

Furthermore, you just KNOW when something is wrong, and doing that is wrong. Obviously if the children had been abused or have a mental problem, then the attraction can't be helped, but the choices the brother and sister from then on are their own.

Zydrate comes in a little glass vial, and the Zydrate goes into the gun like a battery....

reply

[–] bing-57 14 years ago

> It's immoral, disgusting, against every law of nature, man and God.

So then, you don't actually have any real and rationale reasons why it is bad. You don't have any physical or biological reasons. The only reasons that you object to it is simply because you don't like it.

YOU judge it to be immoral. YOU think it is disgusting. YOU read a book that tells you to think that it is a sin. Every objection that you have comes simply from your own judgment.

And by the way, nature has no problem with it. Every species in the world will mate with its own siblings.

> the potential to create a family of genetically damaged children.

Ah. At least you finally have a medical reason. Unfortunately, DNA damage from familial incest is very rare until the same family inbreeds with itself exclusively for dozens of generations. This did happen to royal families in Europe many centuries ago.

But that is not really what we are talking about here, is it? We are talking about occasional couplings and marriages of siblings, not generations after generations. Such occasional couplings would not produce more damaged children than couplings by unrelated people.

> Furthermore, you just KNOW when something is wrong, and doing that is wrong.

Well, that is only wrong in your mind. You know darn well that what one person finds disgusting another person will often find it to be beautiful.

I do get the impression that the bulk of your problem with incest comes mainly from that little book that you carry around. And it is not so much that you object to the act itself but that people out there are disobeying your personal rules as to the way those other people should act.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

reply

[–] Dr_Cosmo_McKinley 14 years ago

Rather than criticise my reasons for why it is wrong, why don't you tell me why it is okay.

Zydrate comes in a little glass vial, and the Zydrate goes into the gun like a battery....

reply

[–] bing-57 14 years ago

> Rather than criticise my reasons for why it is wrong

Fair enough. You seem not to be able to defend your reasons anyway.

> why don't you tell me why it is okay.

It is always okay because when two people love each other, no book or the disapproval of others should keep them apart.

Love is always a good thing. I would have hoped that your good book would agree. I guess I had assumed that love was important to you.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

reply

[–] Dr_Cosmo_McKinley 14 years ago

Love just like everything else in this world has its boundaries. There are perverse, twisted and wrong forms of love. Would you say the love that a pedophile, rapist or abductor thinks he has for his victims is right just because its a form of sick love?

Furthermore don't criticise my answers, you asked these questions and i'm answering with my point of view. This is a discussion of point of view, not an arguement.

Zydrate comes in a little glass vial, and the Zydrate goes into the gun like a battery....

reply

[–] bing-57 14 years ago

> Love just like everything else in this world has its boundaries.

Nope. Love is eternal. Love is always good and knows no limit. It is sad to think that some people want to put boundaries on love.

> There are perverse, twisted and wrong forms of love.

No. That is simply your own judgment.

> Would you say the love that a pedophile, rapist or abductor thinks he has for his victims is right just because its a form of sick love?

Ah. You used a weasely word. You said that these people THINK that what they are doing is love. I previously defined love as a a mutual attraction between two people (or multiple people for that matter). The examples you gave are not mutual and do not fall under our discussion. There is a big difference between love and lust.

> Furthermore don't criticise my answers, you asked these questions and i'm answering with my point of view.

Yow. I've known a lot of people just like that. They state their opinion and then declare that there will be no debate over it. Can I try it?

Incest between siblings is perfectly fine and is an expression of love. There will be no debate about that. Period. End of discussion.

Wow. That does feel good.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

reply

[–] Dr_Cosmo_McKinley 14 years ago

Well the vast majority of the world would disagree with you but anyway. Good day sir

Zydrate comes in a little glass vial, and the Zydrate goes into the gun like a battery....

reply

[–] bing-57 14 years ago

> Well the vast majority of the world would disagree with you

That is sadly true. You and most of the world aren't ready to accept complete love into your hearts. Instead, you want to love only what is yours and hate anything that is different from you.

--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?

reply

[–] layer8 13 years ago

There is nothing wrong with incest in my opinion. This is a conclusion to the simple moral rule:

Any action between fully-informed persons properly consenting to that action is not wrong.

I think that is a good rule. Personal disgust has nothing to do with it. You can't build a reasonable moral code by using pure intuition. You FEEL incest is wrong. Well what if I FEEL incest is right? We both FEEL different things and why should we go with your feelings instead of mine?

I choose to base my moral code on a very few basic axioms (like the one above) and derive the rest using logic. Logic says, nothing wrong with consensual incest.

reply

[–] Felixthecat34213 10 years ago

What exactly is the problem with having relations with a sibling? Other than two-headed babies?

No matter how much you try you can't change who you are attracted to.

Attraction is not sex, so your wording here doesn't make any relational sense. There are no laws against who or what you're allowed to be attracted to, just how you act upon that attraction. No one is remarking upon the moral ambiguity of attraction. Attraction doesn't necessarily relate to sexuality, one can be attracted to a person or object and not feel a sexual desire.

It is pretty common in the animal kingdom for siblings to mate. And in human terms, royalty did it all the time a few hundred years ago.

Granted, I'll concede the practical problems of sibling mating, but I really don't see why people claim to be outraged.

I find your point of view horrifying, not because of its obvious disregard to a fairly universal moral taboo, but for its disregard to the meaning of the word incest. Psychologists define incest as an abusive familial relationship, meaning that one family member is dominating another. If you believe abuse is wrong, then I fail to understand why you would excuse incest or claim there to be nothing wrong about it.

I'd also like to point out that inbreeding in animals does produce genetic disorders, look at many dog breeds for a good example.

reply

[–] millsyooksy 8 years ago

It's not uncommon for siblings and cousins to molest other siblings and cousins. I have a friend whose grandson was raped by a male cousin when he was 5-8, I'm not sure of the exact age. He was discovered by a parent in the middle of the act. When they questioned the cousin he told the parents that he was just doing what was done to him. The parents got both of the kids into therapy immediately....so you see, this stuff happens. Kids may not realize that it's wrong either.

I'm not a judgmental person but I have friends with brothers and sisters, (I'm an only child), and I've never gotten even an inkling that they wanted to be sexually intimate with one another. I'm sorry I don't think it's "natural."

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] writejulia 11 years ago

It was provocative, but also quite funny in context and his friends totally didn't believe him. I actually laughed out loud many times during the film. It was nice to have some comic relief, especially when the kid found the "two-headed baby" paper. Nice touch.

I thought he was just kind of a dumb kid who wants attention and was really getting into girls. He was shown ogling the cheerleaders and leering at women throughout. He's just a creepy kid. I THINK.

I liked that the film left a lot of weird stuff like this fairly ambiguous.

reply

[–] franzkabuki 11 years ago

Well it did yield one of the most hilarious scenes in the film, when the boy later finds this newspaper featuring a photograph of a two-headed fruit of incest.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] Tri-State_Skater 8 years ago

It was sick. Incest is nasty. Very weird plot point.

reply