MovieChat Forums > Winter Passing (2006) Discussion > why such a debate?

why such a debate?

posted 17 years ago by wolfinspirit
1 reply | jump to latest

I can't believe how many threads on this message board are about the killing of the cat. No one (that I have seen) on here is complaining about the father trying to commit suicide or the daughter taking drugs.

Yes the cat scene WAS disturbing. It was beent to be. Everyone on this board is arguing about the moraliity of that scene. Well sadly, not everyone in life is moral or takes the most humane options. Stuff like this does happen in life. I am NOT advocating it, but it does happen.

Compare this movie to the movie version of "Rent." Collins gets beat up. Benny cuts off the electricity to Mark and Roger's apartment on Christmas eve. Angel kicks a cop during a protest after the protest gets out of hand. Roger's last girlfriend (April) kills herself after finding out that she has AIDS. Angel talks of being given $1,000 for killing a dog belonging to the neighbor of a rich woman (by playing the drums until the dog gets frenzied and falls off a balcony). Mimi is a drug addicted exotic dancer who ends up living on the street after a relapse and almost dies. Angel is a drag queen who dies of AIDs. And this is only part of the story. Some of the fans of the stage version of "Rent" got upset because the movie's director decided NOT to show April laying dead after she killed herself. Granted, I think that scene is unnecessary and I am personally glad that it was left out of the movie version. However I find it interesting that some fans of "Rent" were upset by the omission of that scene --- and yet the cat scene in "Winter Passing" is causing such an uproar on this board.

Ironicly, with everything mentioned above the movie version of "Rent" is PG-13 while "Winter Passing" is Rated R.

[–] thepolygons 15 years ago

The people saying that the drowning of the kitten was wrong are just short sighted or are just fervent animal lovers. Either way that scene did its job and it did so effectively. It was a glimpse into Reese's emotional state depicted in a controversial way. Most would say it was unnecessary but if it was or not the scene played with the viewers emotions and enticed some sort of reaction. If they honestly love movies and choose to comment and critique it that scene should not be the make or break moment for them liking it or not. Sadly many people will not try to break it down and understand it, but would rather be enraged and give their "2 cents". I understand that there are things in movies that are controversial but rather than take something for its surface value they should at least read into it a little more.