I couldn`t figure out why they introduce the fate of a little boy the audience doesn`t know about until the last 5 minutes
The fact that Summer had a 5 year-old son and Clark was the stepfather was revealed fairly early in the movie. She even showed a photo of the boy to Joseph (who is later revealed to be an angel of wrath). Info regarding Clark's questionable relationship with the boy is slowly unearthed from there.
And the behaviour of the wife to trust the stranger was completely illogical given his previous behaviour towards her.
By that time she had clear evidence of Joseph being a supernatural being and, furthermore, he was wholly right about her sin of turning a blind eye to the molestation of her son in the name of maintaining the appearances (lie) of a healthy marriage/family.
why the husband would readily admit he has done something wrong without any hard evidence against him.
The scenario wasn't a human courtroom, but rather a divine confrontation in the desolate desert whereupon evidence is already known by the Almighty.
Clark actually never 'fessed up due to stubborn arrogance, which is (presumably) why divine mercy was not extended to him, as was done with Summer at the end.
to force the motel receptionist into suicide... was over the top for the minor offence of flirting with the husband.
Which reveals that it obviously wasn't just that. She had a long history of such transgressions of which the angel was now confronting her. As it is said, when God's mercy ends, God's judgment begins. For a biblical example, see the fate of pompous Herod in Acts 12:21-23.
The plot has some serious flaws which unfortunately can`t be healed through great landscape shots or a good score.
Does it? Or were you simply unable to discern the clues and draw the likely conclusion? The film respects the intelligence of the viewer to put the pieces of the puzzle together without spelling everything out. That's part of the appeal of psychological flicks like this.
reply
share