MovieChat Forums > Definitely, Maybe (2008) Discussion > Should have ended up with Emily/Sarah

Should have ended up with Emily/Sarah


Call me old school but I think he should have stayed with her Mom just because they had a child together.

reply

No, I don't think they should have. They may have tried before and it didn't work out but who knows

reply

[deleted]

and be miserable? That does more harm than good for all three parties.

Don't worry, I saw Lord of the Rings. I'm not going to end this 17 times.

reply

You're assuming that he had a choice.

reply

It's a movie...the director/writer could have made that choice.

reply

A failed or loveless marriage is too much weight to put on a child's shoulders. Besides, growing up in that environment shows the child what? That that is what a marriage is supposed to be like?

I would rather them divorced and remain friends for her.

reply

[deleted]

^Good post SsShelly. I though the OP's idea about Will and Sarah staying together because of their child was ridiculous. It seemed that their divorce wasn't a bitter one and we never knew exactly why or how it happened.

I grew up and am close friends with several people whose parents divorced and they said the divorce does hurt them but later on the realized the divorce was the right thing for everyone even though things like visits, summers, holidays had to be arranged. I also had friends who told them that they wished their parents would have divorced. I had one friend whose parents fought constantly and often she would call me or stay over at my house when things were bad.

As I mentioned before in the movie Sarah and Will weren't bitter towards each other and I think they would have been the type of the divorced parents that work as a team to give their daughter a good life.

reply

[deleted]

D*mn, you *are* from the new generation. Props, though. Also, I agree about divorce being good at toaster ovens

reply

New generation as nothing to do with it.

reply

I guess the OP struck a nerve.

Think about that and you won't be so freaked out about the idea of divorce next time.


The OP freaked out? LOL. Look at your post - now that's a diatribe of freaking out.

and

Are you trying to imply that children who don't belong to the nuclear family are inferior to those who do belong to the two parent family?


Are you trying to put words in the OP's mouth?

To me that's fcking sick and abusive and quite frankly, cult like.




As if we all have to be shiny happy people living in our cookie cutter homes, in perfect clothes, and be perfect looking. How can society function without uniqueness? We would have no toaster ovens, cars, light bulbs, wheels, etc...if the intention of human society was to be "normal." The uniqueness would be sucked out of us if we all came from such strange little dollhouse lives.


So people were afraid of toasters and technology - things that quickened every day tasks once they were produced and used? That's hard to believe. And you compare that to a nuclear aka "normal" family. You're comparing apples to oranges, sweetie. You seem to forget that "normal" or "average" also helped shape modern America to what it is. Farmers, doctors, nurses, politicians, inventors (Hoover Dam, skyscrapers, the Wright Brothers) all contributed to what America is. Don't forget that.

On the bold: Spare me the tears and "they just don't understand me" malarky. Since when did living in a nuclear *cough*normal*cough* family devoid "uniqueness"? I have friends who grew up in nuclear families that are just fine. I also have some friends whose parents divorced and they turned out fine also. They're no more unique than the former group (unless they're academically gifted). So I guess if one wants to be unique one has to tell their parents to divorce or else any hope for the future world will be lost, and that if the parents want to stay together they're part of a cult. Yea, okay.

I personally would have killed to see my parents get a divorce, children of divorce should be appreciative that their parents decided to do the right thing and not force them to live in a crumbling household. Think of all the kids that live with abusive, neglectful parents and have to stick it out.


Ah. So here's the culprit of your insecurity. Does the phrase "Speak for yourself" ring a bell? You fail to see that divorce families (which also can have neglect and abuse) aren't any stronger than "normal" families that have neglect and abuse. It's clear that the kid character wasn't being abused. It safe to guess that the parents were "just friends" and any romantic feelings were long gone - they got married "just because."

reply

They should've never get together in the first place

reply

thanks for the spoiler alert!!!!!

reply

I found her to be a bit shallow for sleeping with his friend and not believing in his dreams. She must not have cared for him that much. I don't subscribe to the phrase it just happened, you have to at some point say they are friends but not simply care and LET yourself get involved in something that you no you should not do. So it would serve to be correct that she was not a trustworthy person for him, Plus she really may have never truly believed in him. I would bet her character had something to do with there divorce.

reply

Plus, we're all forgetting the most important point... I bet April would have been a demon in the sack.

reply

She slept with his roommate and then dumped him.

Later, he gave her a second chance and she dumped him again - she's evidently the one who filed for divorce - only this time they have a daughter together.

reply

Since no one else has mentioned it, It may be she likes to sleep around, the roommate, or I should say friend I would assume came on to her and she did not back down, I would bet the ranch that she is the type of women who bores easily and likes excitement and attention. Hate to be the one to say it, she's an easy lay. One can never hold on to a pretty gal with loose morals. I did not judge her just because of the affair but to me she seemed hard to keep happy. Didn't anyone else see this. In Summers case whom i would have been o k. with him. I feel she did love him at one point more then the other two did but the timing was off. She was the only one that did not seem confused. On April she was willing to let him go just because of a book. If the daughter had not made a heartfelt plea it would have never happened and I thought she and him would not last, she had to be talked into realizing she should give him a chance, If you love someone this should not be necessary. One last point It would not surprise me if his ex tries to get back into his life at some point.

reply

On April she was willing to let him go just because of a book. If the daughter had not made a heartfelt plea it would have never happened and I thought she and him would not last, she had to be talked into realizing she should give him a chance, If you love someone this should not be necessary.


That is a MAJOR oversimplification. She didn't "let him go just because of a book." He found the last item her deceased father had given her and kept it for over a decade. He went to give it to her when he first found it, but kept it when he saw she was living with a guy. Then he married Emily/Sarah. She had been searching all over for it, and he could have made her so happy by giving it to her but didn't for a looong time.

Plus, it wasn't that she was "willing to let him go." She just wanted him gone immediately after finding out. Can you really blame her for being mad right then and there and not wanting to deal with him? She probably would have forgiven him eventually even if he didn't bring his daughter to her apartment. And it's not like she extensively needed to be talked to and convinced - all he needed to do was tell her basically that he had had feelings for her all that time. She forgave him pretty quickly and was willing to listen to everything as soon as he told her that.

reply