MovieChat Forums > Horsemen (2009) Discussion > Something that struck me as odd (spoiler...

Something that struck me as odd (spoilers)

posted 15 years ago by OutlawsDeLejos
8 replies | jump to latest

Alex was angry at his dad for never being around blah blah blah teen angst leads to elaborate killing spree, whatever. Throughout the film we kept seeing Quaids character ditching his kids because of the case and Alex acting all surly about it. Didn't it occur to him to maybe not kill a bunch of people and then his dad would have time to spend with him? Seems redundant, and why the hell was 30yr old Ziyi Zhang cast as a teenager? This movie had potential but pissed it away on poor decision making.

[–] Passive00 15 years ago

Hahahahaha

"Throughout the film we kept seeing Quaids character ditching his kids because of the case and Alex acting all surly about it. Didn't it occur to him to maybe not
kill a bunch of people and then his dad would have time to spend with him?"

Excellent point!

[–] TheJigsaw 15 years ago

Yeah, the plot was a bit ridiculous. Up until the ending, it was pretty ok, but then the whole explanation ruined it all.

[–] junk_rice 14 years ago

Agreed. I was particularly confused during the scene when they are all supposed to go out to some sporting event. Dad gets the call that he has to examine a dead body. Alex is disappointed. Well, if he hadn't helped kill the guy, they would all go to the game, right?

[–] DaveBond007 14 years ago

"Well, if he hadn't helped kill the guy, they would all go to the game, right? "

The point was that he didnt have to answer his phone. He didnt have to leave. His kids, for once, could have been more important to him than his policework. But it wasnt. If it wasnt Alex's crimes, it would have been another case Quaid would have been on, that left the kids alone, with plenty of 20 dollar bills to spend.

You guys really missed the point there. Its better to watch a film and listen, than to sit there and TRY to find something wrong with it. Which is all anyone seems to want to do with this film.

[–] zwooven 9 years ago

The point was that he didnt have to answer his phone. He didnt have to leave. His kids, for once, could have been more important to him than his policework.

Except in this case, it wasn't just policework, it was trying to stop a serial killer from killing again.

His work wasn't more important than his kids, stopping a killer was more important than a ballgame.

[–] Merrida 8 years ago

This is exactly the point! Exactly! And I can see where a large group are missing that understanding entirely. That is now how abused and neglected dysfunctional relationships work. The whole dynamic is: If it isn't one thing it'll be another, and always at the expense of the kids.

I see this as a perfectly logical reaction to being ignored and neglected, abandoned during the formative years. No, I am not condoning it, but I am saying that I can wrap my head around the psychology of kids wanting to act out on or against the people who are supposed to protect them and care for them who abuse that right, privilege and responsibility.

These are not relationships of logic. They are of emotion, or lack of, and of availability and prioritizing. After all, Alex DID "do nothing" for years, and that did not pay off in his Dad recognizing him.

As Dr. Joy Browne (RIP) would say: Kids would rather be praised than punished, and would rather be punished than ignored.

______________________________________
Sic vis pacem para bellum.

[–] apocalypse_please24 14 years ago

Haha, exactly.

Semper fi, sissy britches!

[–] faithdwnsouth 9 years ago

Because in Alex's mind if his dad wasn't ditching him for this case it would have just been some other case instead. He would show contempt to his father each time he was ditched for the Horemen's case in hopes of his father would reprioritize before it was too late and knowing if his father didn't that he would soon teach his father a lesson the hard way.