MovieChat Forums > The Girl Next Door (2008) Discussion > A few things that made it hard for me to...

A few things that made it hard for me to sympathise with Meg.


This film was truly disturbing and in posting this I am in no way absolving the guilt and blame on the boys who were also victims of Ruth, a woman.

Having said that there were certain aspects of Meg's character that made it hard for me to sympathise with her, although of course I did sympathise with her to an extent. Nobody should have to go through that, it's sickening.

1. Why did she flirt with younger boys? This was probably the most disturbing part of the movie for me. Meg seemed to be subtly flirting with David (a much younger boy). I don't know why this is being overlooked. I cringed when she gave that painting to him, and the way she was laughing with him. It seemed to suggest there were motives. Perhaps this is what Ruth was getting at when she said there were bad things Meg had done that she wanted her to confess to?

2. Considering it was the 50's, Meg's dress seemed too provocative. Why on earth was she running around in shorts that barely covered her bottom? Especially around young and impressionable boys, this is one thing that made me feel a little uncomfortable with Meg. Sure it wouldn't be seen as much today, but just imagine the 50's. My mother told me she wasn't even allowed to wear Jeans because they insinuated a woman with loose morals, and that was the 70's! If she didn't want male attention and for people to call her a whore or slut, then she should have covered up and dressed a bit more respectively. Of course things are different now, but in the context of the time.

So there are some reasons leading me to be suspicious of Meg, that she wasn't all that innocent and I think Ruth knew too.

reply

I believe Meg's 16 years old based on Slyvia Lykens's age

reply

Read The Basement by Kate Millett. The girl modelled after Sylvia in this movie appeared to me to simply want friendship and rescue, probably much like the real Sylvia. True to the culture of the time, a male of, say, fourteen had more (social) value and "say-so" than a girl of fifteen/sixteen. I think her somewhat flirtatious overtures are not unreasonable.

As for her clothes, it was a different time; no decent person would look at a child baring their legs to be "sexy", and once a girl got close enough to womanhood to where it might be inappropriate, their parents would step in and replace the shorts with a more appropriate skirt or pedal-pushers, etc... In real life, Sylvia's parents were 1) gone; 2) carnival workers iirc; 3) very poor. If the real Gertrude had thought the real Sylvia's dress immodest, it was probably because Sylvia had absentee parents and no appropriate clothes.

reply

Megan was around 16 and David maybe 13. Both of them were minors. If that and the fact that her clothes were provocative make it so hard to sympathise with a torture victim, you gotta have a visit to the shrink.

reply

If you think that wearing provocative clothing and being flirtatious, make a torture victim less deserving of sympathy, then you are one sick person. But I'm pretty sure your being a troll.

reply

I never got the impression she was flirting with the boys. I think she was supposed to be portrayed as friendly, which she most likely was in real-life having come from carnival parents, carnies usually are very friendly down-to-earth people.

And being that this is a movie and probably no way to be exactly sure what Sylvia did wear at that time, I would say the clothing Meg wore was probably nothing like what Sylvia wore at the time as how are they to truly know? Its not as if what she wore would have ever been documented.

I'm always right 

reply

I blame her as a victim because she responded so poorly despite being nearly an adult.

She should have convinced David to send help. If necessary, either have sex with him or promise to do so as an incentive. David was not willing to help her out because the culture of that time did not encourage intervening in other people's affairs. She should have tipped the balance with an incentive.

She should not have gone back for her sister. It is stupid. If she got free, the cops would have helped them. If she didn't, they are both screwed.

I think it is quite fair to blame her because of her maturity and the fact that she had plenty of time to plan and think since she was held captive for so long. It wasn't as if it was a split-second decision.

reply

"She should have convinced David to send help. If necessary, either have sex with him or promise to do so as an incentive."

Please don't have children.

Thanks!

++++++
Love means never having to say you're ugly. - The Abominable Dr. Phibes

reply

Please don't voice your retarded thoughts again.

Thanks!

reply

It's a shame that you hate women, or maybe women scare you. But a real show of character would be to rise above that and be a respectful person, instead of letting your hatred swallow you.

++++++
Love means never having to say you're ugly. - The Abominable Dr. Phibes

reply

It is a shame that you are retarded. Maybe you should deal with that instead of looking elsewhere for validation?

Lol at the libtard that doesn't engage with any content at all, only insults, and yet trying to claim the moral high ground.

reply

It'll be OK. Someday you might grow out of this. In the meantime try not to be a dick.

++++++
Love means never having to say you're ugly. - The Abominable Dr. Phibes

reply

It is not ok. Afraid you will always be a retard. Try to deal with it. :)

reply

No, I agree with Deb. For the sake of mankind, do not have children.

reply

You don't think what happened to Meg was OK. BUT since she wore shorts and was good friends with a boy, it's pretty suspicious. And hanging her from the ceiling, punching her, raping her and burning her clit off well, that comes with the territory of being so promiscuous. Imagine if she ever had sex! What would she have deserved?


++++++
Love means never having to say you're ugly. - The Abominable Dr. Phibes

reply

Forget it Deb. He used the word "libtard" which means he's a conservative, and all cons hate women to one degree or another. It's systemic.

reply

I can't tell if you're actually being serious here....

You're saying that because she was supposedly "promiscuous", Meg deserved the torture she got? Even in the 50's when this movie was set, I highly doubt that would have been that case.

Also, being good friends with a boy is suspicious? Hardly. Even back then, I doubt it'd have been ALL that suspicious. Unusual maybe, but hardly suspicious.

You do also realize this movie was based loosely on Sylvia Likens case back in 1965/1966? What did SHE do that she "deserved" what she got?

reply

I really can't tell if you're just a troll or you really mean what you say.

reply