MovieChat Forums > Dear Wendy (2005) Discussion > You're All Missing The Point

You're All Missing The Point

posted 18 years ago by Buffy24601
34 replies | jump to latest

IF there is any moral to the movie, it isn't that guns are evil. It's that guns are simply tools and have no inherent morality.

1. The Dandies were intent on never using their guns to harm others, unless, as in the end, they have no other choice. They kept their gun use to a place away from the rest of society, simply researching and having fun with target practice.

2. All of the adults in town were terrified, even paranoid, of the idea of guns and gangs. Mr. Solomon, Clarabelle, etc. The sheriff also assumed guns = bad people. But this wasn't true. The Dandies were good people, something that all of the very same characters pointed out throughout the movie, until they discovered the guns. They were good kids, Dick was a nice boy, etc.

3. Despite being such "good boys", when a TOTAL ACCIDENT occurs, involving a SENILE old woman who's not entirely aware of her surroundings, they entire town rallies against them simply because they HAVE guns. Not because THEY have done ANYTHING wrong, only because they have guns. This is ironic because 30 or more well-armed police show up. Well-armed. This has nothing to do with the Dandies themselves, because they are considered good people, but the guns themselves, which by their PERCIEVED nature, have tainted them.

4. The Dandies are not only going out and getting shot because they want to deliver some coffee. After they lose most of their coffee, they continue. This is about an ideal. About freedom and their right to carry arms (hey, remember the Constitution everyone? Right to bear arms?). They are given the option to give up their "partners" but they choose not to. Why? Not because they guns have made them a blood thirsty gang (Huey first warns the police that they do not want to open fire and only wish to help Clarabelle to her annual visit) but because they have a right to not only their guns, but their choices. To give up their guns to the police would be to give up their rights, their ideals, their personal and private freedoms. It would also be accepting that they had done something wrong - but they haven't. They've injured or threatened no one, and their guns were neither, as far as the movie shows, illegal or dangerous to anyone.

5. The police, despite logical attempts to discuss their motivation and intent, assume that these people are dangerous. They don't ask why they carry guns, or if they are legally registered, or if the guns have ever been used against anyone. The line is simply drawn that guns make you bad, unless you're a cop, and then you can shoot people whenever you need or want to. Is that fair? No. Therefore, the Dandies fight both hypocritical viewpoints and police brutality. The police, within this film, have been condescending, sneaky, violent, and racist. This is part of the point. The ironic paradox of good people not being allowed to carry guns, while arrogant and tainted yet powerful individuals have them and may use them as they so desire.

6. Finally, yes. It is completely over the top. Social commentaries tend to be. It's (potentially) addressing the issues of gun control and police brutality. We had to be clear on the fact that the police aren't so obviously good guys, that the Dandies would die for their beliefs, that guns cause violence but only in the hands of people intent on causing it, etc. It was unrealistic.

However, I've seen lesser things happen - a friend was expelled from school because he came to class right after a hunting trip with his father. His gun was locked in his car, down the street in a public parking lot (the school is overcrowded) and yet someone saw it, assumed the worst, and reported it. In France, the Paris riots were sparked by police shooting a teen who was fleeing during a chase. Their was no proof of involvement in any crime, and he was shot in the back.

Point being, this isn't a movie about the evils of guns (though guns can definitely be used for evil - I think the police in this movie were doing more harm than the Dandies ever could have) or a simply coming of age story. It, at it's best, can be extremely thought provoking and important.

[–] nvt1-1 15 years ago

I agree completely with Buffy, as said in some older movie, guns don't kill people, people kill people. Regarding the whole thing about gun control, it's too late. I mean if you ask me I think that the human race should have stayed with single action revolvers, why you may ask....well it's simple, the single action means that you need skill to shoot anyone and plus it's six shooter, meaning you really need to know how to shoot. If you want to get into some school and shoot bunch of people you'd need to be a really good shooter and to know a lot about guns and to be fast loader. So, my opinion is that they should stop producing automatic and semi-automatic firearms and slowly destroy all the automatic guns that are currently in possession of criminals, obviously that can't really work because what about the rest of the world.

So basically, it's too late and everyone should have right to carry firearm, the only reason why crap happens is because the people who are selling automatic firearms are not carefully inspecting buyers for mental illness and similar, but then it happens invasion on privacy.

So, what about the idea that everyone goes into school carrying a gun, it's interesting idea and should be researched further. The students would first have to complete certain test for mental evaluation and then give em guns, the worst that can happen is definitely better than what happened already so many times. Although it would be good if limitation would be to having certain amount of bullets because even if some crazy person would get in with 100bullets they simply wouldn't be able to kill 100people because everyone would have a gun drawn when they would hear the first gun shot and 10good people with singe bullet each against one mentally unstable person and especially if they would surround that person means that maybe only one person would die, maybe that person would think twice etc.

Anyways, great movie and I am fan of singe action revolvers and old west.

http://mydollarsoftware.com - custom made open source programs, have liberty with what you buy.

[–] Drewy 12 years ago

And it's posts like this from nvt1-1 that show that von Trier's very worthwhile efforts to educate don't sink in to the very heads that it was meant to influence.

guns don't kill people, people kill people

I knew someone would trot out this ridiculous cliche. And the writer and director even tried to address this very piece of bogus logic. Dick decided that Wendy was becoming so good that she could fire on her own. People don't kill people, guns kill people lol.

The simple fact is that if I walk into my neighbouring school now and decide I want to kill as many as possible, and I'm unarmed, I might strangle one or two before a pile of people overwhelmed me. If I was carrying a baseball bat I might batter several people to death before someone had the courage to sneak up behind me and unarm me. If I had a revolver I could easily kill half a dozen, then reload and continue. If I had an automatic weapon I could kill multiple victims. The gun itself doesn't kill people, that's true, but without a gun in my hand I would be unsuccessful in inflicting my intended mayhem.

Now I know that those who support gun ownership would suggest that, if all the kids in my neighbouring school carried weapons too, I would be gunned down before I killed more than a few people. That's probably true - but how many more innocent victims would be hurt because now, instead of one nutter shooting, we have several nutters shooting. The situation doesn't improve, it gets worse.

Countries that have successfully removed guns from the general populace, even if they aren't able to remove every single gun from every single criminal, are inherently safer and have many fewer violent deaths.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wwolf-8 11 years ago

I think, that Vinterberg is taking the same subject to another context in The Hunt, with the subject of pedophilia. Guns are not evil, they only become dangerous if the people, who carry them get pushed over the line. The fear from the part of society and they ignorance about the facts + the person, who carries the gun / allegedly carries the illness pushes them over the line. The Dandies were a bunch of losers, who already knew what is it like to live in a context, where they can't be the good ones. So they created one for themselves, they gave power themselves and said, that we are good. Society called them bad even louder now and they were forced to protect their roles with violance, which is basically the human reaction, not the good one. I think this movie is about taking responsibility for the roles we create for each other, and not blaming every bad thing on guns and the people who gets pushed to use them.