The Business of Strangers


I enjoyed the movie, but was puzzled at the ending; what was the real reason Paula (Stiles) wanted revenge? I'm assuming she wasn't really raped. Maybe she was just a psychopath.

reply

Yeah i think that was the idea. He didn't really rape anyone but she was just trying to prove a point that he'd wake up and not want to imagine what he did. I think the film was about loneliness. Julia Stiles's character wanting to give Stockard Channing some excitement and so making up interesting tales.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I think Julia Stiles' character was either raped by another man and Nick makes the perfect patsy, or if she wasn't actually raped, she FEELS she's been raped - (ie, compromised) by having to be a woman.

reply

Julia's character was a writer who writes 'non fiction'. She set up the whole thing so she would have another story to write about. And she used Stockard Channing's character to write it.

If I had a nickel for every cigarette your mom smoked, I'd be dead.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Interesting observation mr. flatley. :)

I just watched this movie, and I think that you are correct.

reply

Just saw this movie and really liked it. Good acting all around. I think many of the points already made by others here were indeed intentional in the movie--the lies/facades of people's lives, the loneliness, the unexpressed and often hidden aggression between men and women. My take on the characters is that Paula was a psychopath and indeed was using Julia to make up a story. I think Paula was a lesbian and hated men in a different way than Julia did--the former just not relating to them at all, while the latter had a lot of resentment toward them as she crawled her way to the top of the male-dominated corporate world (or maybe her failed marriage played a part!). The interaction between the two women changed Julia--it made her rethink the "great news" about becoming CEO and having to deal with more of the same. I think the photo Paul tore up was a red herring--thrown in to keep you guessing about the real identity of Nick. But ultimately, the movie wasn't about Nick, and it almost didn't matter what he did or didn't do--the alchemy occurred between the women.

reply

but who says she was never raped. just because she wasn't raped by Nick. doesn't mean she wasn't raped at all. She could have been raped and like some rape victims like to take out there anger on being raped on men who aren't the ones that did anything.

that or she is a pathological lier. could go either way.

reply

I agree. I think Paula was raped, but not by Nick. Without that she has no motivation for doing what she does, or for being so angry. Without that she is just a sadistic psychopath. And this movie is smarter than that. Perhaps people who think Paula's a psychopath are reading this like a thriller. It's a drama.

I think the movie is about anger and repression. Both women are angry but whereas Paula expresses it, Julie represses it. Paula senses that about Julie and thinks she can teach her a lesson on how to express her anger. But ultimately Julie isn't buying. She sees a lot of herself in Paula and doesn't like what she sees.

In the end Paula is the 'loser', despite the fact that she writes the word on Julie when she is sleeping. Paula is the one consumed with anger. Consider the final shot of her at the airport - alone, earphones on, isolated, hard, unyielding. Julie, on the other hand, ends the film by reconsidering the choices she has made in her life, and, possibly, ready to make some changes.


King Kong, little elves, on the rooftops they dance - Bob Dylan, Farewell Angelina

reply

I agree with most of the comments above. But I'm not sure I agree that Paula is a psychopath,and I take issue with the assumption that lesbians hate men.

Obviously Paula is a very angry person. So is Julie. I think Paula sees this and plays with it. One thing that I think everyone has failed to mention is that, at least at the start of their encounter in the hotel, we should remember that Paula is VERY angry with JULIE --- and rightfully so, since Julie was a complete raving a-hole to Paula when Paula showed up late for the meeting and called to have her fired.

So, at least in the beginning, I don't think we have to look very deeply to see why Paula starts screwing around with Julie -- imposing on her, taking her pills, etc. I think Paula may just be a sufficently strong enough personality to decide that she's going to play nice a little bit and maybe take advantage and/or get revenge on Julie for how she was treated.

We can read the movie a couple of ways -- including that the immediate anger and desire to get back at Julie drives all of Paula's actions throughout the movie. I think it gets more complex. I think that BOTH Paula and Julie are lonely people and when Paula tries to embarass Julie in the elevator with the suggestion that they are lovers, she is surprised when Julie plays along and they bond a little.

After that the tensions get interesting -- there is clearly some same-sex flirting going on -- I think more seriously from Paula's side than from Julie's (who I think is willing to flirt in a friendly/fun sort of way, but not really interested -- I think she is SO lonely for some kind of human contact that she let's it get a little further than she meant.) I also suspect that Paula is a little jealous/impressed with Julie, although she really doesn't want to let on and wants not just her passing friendship, but maybe some mentoring.

Paula's obviously very angry about something -- maybe she was raped, maybe it's other stuff. And she's obviously jealous when the headhunter appears and sort of breaks up her party with Julie (though let's not forget that Paula was off making out with some guy, who rejected her, it appears, when she bit his ear). So the storytelling part, saying that this was guy who raped her friend, may have been Paula's way to get rid of the guy and continue bonding (and maybe, in her head, going a little further) with Julie.



reply

Or Paula could be telling the absolute truth.. In the final scene when the headhunter is asked what he did the previous night by Julia, he lies to her face and says he met a stockbroker who gave him tips.. Then he's asked where he went to graduate school and says Ohio State.. The point is that we know he lied about his whereabouts the night before, why should we believe that he went to Ohio State and, as he also states, had only been to Boston one time?.. He establishes no credibility to the audience.. The ending of this movie is very subjective...

reply

We also know that he lied during his first meeting with Julie. ("Pacific Net's going belly-up.") And, Julie needed more reassurance that Nick wasn't looking for someone to replace HER. ("You remember how you got me MY job.")

Then when he finds out Julie's been offered the CEO-ship:

He says, "We can use that in leverage for the Pacific Net job."
Julie: "I thought they were going belly-up?"
Nick: "With all due respect, I didn't know I was talking to CEO potential"

That's what I love about the movie, there's no way to tell which story is true. We know the Paula character is shady, but the Nick character is shady in business as well.

reply

"Paula's obviously very angry about something -- maybe she was raped, maybe it's other stuff."

Check out Paula's backstory: went to Dartmouth (greek and conservative) and bopped down to the frat party in Boston. Surprise-she's raped, and returns to the similar environs in Hanover to "stay in her room until she graduated" stewing, hardening, and cultivated a new personality, tattoos and all.

I enjoyed the script as well-the elevator scene was hilarious.

Also Stiles' best performance, easy. Give 'em good dialogue and let 'em run with it.

reply

I've not seen this movie..what in the name of god is the elevator scene? (I'm getting the DVD on saturday lol)
CaZz

*~Stockard Channing is God~*

reply

Paula (Stiles) mumbles some stuff about being sorry, she just wasn't into it, etc... Julie finally bites and she says "About the strap-on" and instead of getting offended (the elevator is full of people) she plays along, asking why she freaked out, is it because the strap on was black, calling PAula racist cause she didn't want to be screwed by a black strap-on.

's very amusing

(Insert something clever here)

reply

Perhaps you are simplifying it yourself, Paula was a mean person who used the crime of accusing someone of something they did not do to get to someone for her own pleasure. No one is looking at this from the accused point of view. How would you like to be in his situation and others used she was a whatever as a excuse, where would that leave you. There is no excuse for what she did. And the guy was the one who paid the price.

reply

Nice last shot of her just staring, wondering why the hell would the girl make all of that up. I was wondering the exact same thing.

reply

[deleted]

I think the mystery of why Paula did all of it was part of the movie.
Maybe she had no ulterior motive. I'm guessing this might've been how she
got her rocks off, just psychologically toying with men and women.

reply

I think Paula basically did it for the lulz. Shes writing the "non-fiction" stories but who knows if thats going anywhere, Julias seemed like a a decent judge of character I think her description of Paula as basically a spoiled rich girl going through a phase is probably correct. Of course Paula is disturbed (who isnt?)( I wouldnt call her a psycopath though), her "anger and control" issues speech seemed to be as much about her as it is about Julia, she basically gets off screwing with people for that reason.

Oh and I think the photograpahs are about "control" you cant be much more in control than when someone is passed to the point you can take pictures and write on them, and the picture proves it to the "victim".

reply