MovieChat Forums > Right at Your Door (2006) Discussion > Awww y'alls naivete is so cute (spoilers...

Awww y'alls naivete is so cute (spoilers)

posted 15 years ago by les_loupe
5 replies | jump to latest

First things first, I was expecting to hate the guy when I first read what it was about but while some are saying he was selfish and horrible, I'm not so sure. He didn't really just leave her outside to die, he fixed it so she could have the bedroom and a bathroom and stayed by her as much as he could.

He was only doing what he was supposed to and after her first bout of freaking out she was on board with the way they ended up handling it. I don't think he did anything really bad at all, at the end when they were dragging her away he was going to throw open the door and try to save her even if it would have killed him.

Now, the comment about so many of you being naive. You really are if you think things would definitely never have gone the way it went in terms of him being sealed in and basically put to death. That would SO happen. Everyone seems to think that the government, police, soldiers etc etc are all on some altruistic high but that isn't reality, far from it in fact.

I am not saying this is definitely the way it WOULD go just that it's a definite possibility. They could have been a little nicer about the way they killed him off though. Shooting him would have been kinder and maybe I missed something but I am not sure what they were pumping in that killed him.

The only thing I could surmise (assuming I didn't miss something vital which I prob did) is that it was some kind of agent that would neutralize the toxin or whatever it was and he had to be living in order for it to make his body clear of it or something like that. That way they don't have to worry about transport after he is dead.

I mean, they made it clear that it was too late for him to survive so they had to think of everyone else. It makes sense if you go along with the dust blah blah blah.

Anyway, my point was that the "officials" wouldn't give a crap who they had to kill, if for whatever reason they thought it was necessary or just safe-er (as opposed to safe) they would totally take out people, whole families. They tend to think big picture right or wrong.

http://www.luminouslips.com
http://www.gblpridejewelry.com

[–] gg_uaw9669 15 years ago

I'll disagree about his being a prick, but, for the rest, I think you're right. The government is MORE than a little willing to throw you under a bus, if it's to their benefit. If it helps us all to boot, well that's just gravy, but, the key is whether or not it fulfills whatever objective they're pursuing.
I think they were just pumping in poison gas, to me that seems a little more humane than just putting a bullet in him, besides, if you shoot him, you compromise the tent.

I've....seen things you people wouldn't believe; Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.

[–] psdhart 14 years ago

good point, look what happened after Katrina in New Orleans

[–] samup7775 8 years ago

What happened? I guess two weeks notice isn't enough to get people to leave. EVERYTHING is somebody's else's fault this generation..and their TRUE animal selfs showed during those times in which normal folks woulda came together. Katrina was nature's way of flushing the toilet and it didn't totally work because Jackson, Sharpton, and other turds are still floating around.

[–] activista 8 years ago

@samup7775

You're just an ignorant racist idiot. A lot of people couldn't leave the area Katrina hit because they had no transportation,for one thing. Also, if you'd done some research, nobody even know that the dam had broken and was starting to flood everything until it was too late. People had already spent years evacuating from New Orleans and nothing had happened to destroy anyone's homes or neighborhoods---in fact, the last actual flood similar to Katrina had happened in 1927----78 years BEFORE Katrina. You need to be asking why Bush didn't allocate funds to the state of Louisiana to get the dam (which was said to be old and in need of repair) fixed---the then-govenor had requested such funds and didn't get them. So no one was even remotely expected the damn to break---a hurricane was one thing, the dam breaking and causing the entire city was completely another. Yet ignorant racists like you want to blame only the black citizens of New Orleans (who were the most devastated by the flood) as if it were all their fault. And there were tales of people who did, in fact, help each other though that terrible time---look them up---there are also several books about the Katrina, such as NOT JUST THE LEVEES BROKE (by a Katrina survivor) the films TROUBLE THE WATER (co-made by a couple who also survived Katrina) and another documentary called WHEN THE LEVEES BROKE:A REQUIEM IN FOUR ACTS (there's also a follow-up doc to that one called IF GOD IS WILLING AND DA CREEK DON'T RISE.)

Also, what I fins interesting is that whenever tornados hit places like Oklahoma and Florida, no one ever tells the people there that they should have moved,that they deserved what they got because they were poor----probably because they're mostly white--that figures.

[–] boban_2 14 years ago

If the situation was reversed there would not be so many threads about it. He would have been expected to sit outside by himself and die so she could live. Possession of a vagina does not make one person more important than another. They were both being selfish but her selfishness ended up getting him killed.

As for the gassing I would think they would at least quarantine him first and really check him instead of just killing him right there. I would also think they would have to do that at quite a few houses which would not go over well later on.