MovieChat Forums > Goliath (2008) Discussion > I guess sociopath is the new indie flavo...

I guess sociopath is the new indie flavor


I watched two indie movies recently: Good Dick and Goliath. Since this isn't a board about Good Dick, I will just say the main actress in that movie plays a sociopath that pushes everybody away that tries to get close to her, and it was very disturbing to watch.

Goliath seems to continue this new trend. On the surface, this movie appears to be trying to appeal to the Napoleon Dynamite crowd. (And, like most Napoleon Dynamite wannabe movies, this comes with the obligatory hand drawn background art for no apparent reason. Oh, wait...that hand drawn art on the cover of Napoleon Dynamite had a reason...the main character DREW those pictures. Every indie movie with annoying doodles on the cover since then do it for no reason at all!) And, while there may be sociopathic tenancies in characters in Napoleon Dynamite, it never approached the level where it was uncomfortable to watch.

I am not against movies that push my comfort levels. I love quite a few movies that do that...Todd Solondz, for example, pushes my comfort levels in much of his work but he does a good job of it. There are consequences for his characters' actions. In Goliath, the main character is a dysfunctional social reject that displays sociopathic behaviors that are at the same time shocking and disturbing, and you keep on waiting for something to happen to counter balance what you are seeing on the screen. You wonder when will his neighbors call the police on him? When is he going to be fired from his job? And, quite seriously, when is the police going to be called on him? He does some shocking things towards the end of the movie...acts that border on a suburban Taxi Driver with garden tools instead of a gun. And, at the end of the movie, apparently nothing has changed for him. The movie apparently has a happy ending for him, and the character did not deserve a happy ending.

In other words, there's no character growth and there are no consequences for his actions. At a very fundamental level, this is a evidence of very poor movie making.

Further evidence of very poor movie making are scenes that just go on painfully too long. The document signing scene, for example, was meandering and could have made its point in being edited down for time. Assuming we cared about the point. But we really don't.

I don't know if it's a commentary on the movie makers' skewed sense of reality or if they are playing out some revenge fantasies they had regarding neighbors and co-workers they didn't like. It seems they want you to think everybody around the main character are idiots and morons, but all I got a sense of was the main character was an idiot and a moron and he was sociopathic and could not relate to anybody in his life. The other characters are exaggerated and more charactures than characters, only these charactures are not funny. The main character doesn't manage to make himself to be cared about by the audience, and this movie fails to make you feel anything for the main character. There is no reason to see him succeed at what he is trying to accomplish. In fact, you want to see him fail, and when he doesn't fail it only leads to further frustration. And this movie is already enough of a frustrating experience.

Avoid. Like a bad plague.

reply

Completely concur with this lengthy post: This was a dreadful movie. It had a single decent scene: the signing of the divorce papers.

Beyond that, nothing to recommend it. Zero stars.

reply

Agree. Lots of awful in this film but the naked taiko drumming video made up for some of it. And trying to blow smoke into a condom. And chasing after his wife with a tree trimmer. The electric can opener on the highway. The weirdness is worth at least 2 stars.

reply

I didn't care for how he treated his neighbor and then got a kitten from a shelter. I absolutely adore cats which is what drew me to the film but the film was atrocious. I agree that the divorce paper signing scene was the only good scene.

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

reply

I agree with the above posts.

I had no prior knowledge of this movie, but saw it in Blockbuster and picked it up because I love cats.

I thought the movie would have a LITTLE more to do with his search for his kitty, especially since the cat's name is the movie's TITLE.

Instead I found the movie was a lot more about this guy's very pitiful life, and his trying to cope with it; a theme I am all in favor of, when it's handled well. The synopsis of this film is entirely misleading. Animal lovers won't find much for them here, except for some precious few moments.

None the less, there were still moments where I laughed and even cried a little.

Ultimately, I wish indie films would lose the hand-made stylings of sketched cover art, spacey, immaterial music that conveys little to no feeling, and overblown attempts to be just too damned far off the wall.

reply

[deleted]

SPOILERS FOR BOTH GOLIATH AND GOOD DICK!!!
-
-
-
-
-
I don't understand how you see either the character from this movie or Good Dick (both characters without names, which is odd) as sociopaths. She was scarred deeply from systematic sexual abuse, and he was completely, completely alone in the world. Neither one of them could interact normally with society because of these facts. That doesn't make them sociopaths. Further more, the endings of both movies show character growth. For Woman, she is finally able to begin breaking out of her shell, and for The Guy, he overcomes his grief and tries to start his life anew.

-------
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=Beckmen

reply

I don't think that "sociopath" is the best way to describe Goliath's unnamed antihero (who I'll call The Guy here for the sake of simplicity). He's not smooth, skillfully manipulative or entirely amoral. On the other hand, he's certainly angry, self-justifying and impulsive. So, six of one, half-dozen of the other...

I'd describe him as a loser: a childish, selfish, antisocial jerk caught in downward spiral. And loser has been a popular indie flavor since the 80s. He does have a mental breakdown of some sort at the end of the film, resulting in a violent rampage, so I see where you're coming from in characterizing him as mentally ill, but "sociopath" seems to strong and too clinically specific a term.

Anyway, I don't think we're meant to share his view of his co-workers and his sex offender neighbor. Sure, the co-workers are buffoons, but they're also obviously much happier and more well-adjusted than he is. And the neighbor, whatever his crimes, does no wrong over the course of the film. When The Guy finally attacks him at the end, I think we're supposed to be horrified (to at least some extent, though the situation retains a darkly comic edge). I didn't get any sense that from these scenes that the filmmakers' old grievances were being aired. In almost every case, The Guy comes off worse than the grotesques to which he is compared.

The company's bosses, on the other hand, are little more than demeaning, shallow caricatures, and familiar ones at that. I was disappointed by this decision because The Guy's awkwardness and inability to connect would probably be more resonant and interesting in a world where the other characters were less obviously alienated themselves. Plus the long-takes naturalism seemed at odds with the broader and goofier aspects of the comedy.

I think I would have liked this film better if it had committed itself more fully either to broad comedy or to naturalistic observation. As it was, the two strategies seemed at odds with one another. It's not as though they can't work together (Jim Jarmusch, for example, does wonderful work at the intersection of vacancy and cracking wise), but the Zellners don't seem to have the knack.

You must have been so afraid, Cassie... Then you saw a cop.

reply

Saw this in Blockbuster and rented it due to being an animal/cat lover. "A comedy about a man who loses everything - his wife, his job, his mind, but most importantly, his cat". Alright, I'm sold :-)

It was ok, 5 stars. Got to disagree with most here about the divorce paper signing scene, that was the least favorite for me. Went on *way* too long. Almost singlehandedly put me to sleep like a bad trip to the vet ;-)

You're supposed to believe the cat is the most important thing in his life, the one thing he has left. I should be putty in the filmmakers' hands, but they dropped the ball. The Guy kept using that same catcall, in the same annoying tone each time. Sounded like a guy going thru the motions. Also don't like how he assumed the sex offender killed his cat, since like another poster said, the guy did nothing wrong in the actual movie.

The office scenes were better and built empathy. The bosses were clearly taking advantage of him, why couldn't they fire the other guy themselves? I'd probably act the same as The Guy if I had to be the bad guy and tell someone he's being let go. Great scene, awkward in a good way. As to the co-workers, who wants to be called "bitch tits" all the time? No wonder people snap.

So I can't really blame him for preferring the company of animals. I'm one rung higher on the social ladder with my wife, but I feel his pain :-) So maybe that's why I feel "sociopath" and "loser" are a bit harsh lol I'd go with: awkward, misfit, quirky. Big jump from that to sociopath.

Overall, while not a great movie by any means, I liked how it was so awkward and uncomfortable. Reminded me of Punch Drunk Love (though not as good). Made it more realistic and human than the Hollywood type movies where everyone's smooth and making snappy comebacks. Don't get me wrong, I love those movies, but its hard to relate. Last thought: loved the ending :-)


"I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule."

reply