MovieChat Forums > Kites (2010) Discussion > How are the lead characters right?

How are the lead characters right?


I mean they portray them as the ones who are in love and Tony as the bad guy. I'm not saying he is a good guy but how is it right to con them?

Both J and Natasha took off insulting the family and breaking the heart of Gina. She was an innocent victim of J. Does it justify that he found love so he is the good guy?

I mean, if a wife of someone took off with her lover, should the husband sit at home and wish them well because she found love? Or should he feel betrayed and angry at the person? Since Tony and his father were already in the violence business, it is natural for him to look for retribution from them isn't it?

For some reason, I cannot seem to find the lead characters morally right.

<<-- Mess With The Best, Die Like The Rest -->>

reply

they are not the most moral couple but that guy tony should have gotten the hint already i mean J let him leave but no he kept going. Besides Tony and "Natasha" would have gotten more rougher in the relationship. Gina, i understand why she shot him i mean any girl would do the same.lol

a movie is just a movie! get it in ur head.

reply

But it wasn't Tony who betrayed J. It was J who betrayed Tony and his family. So J stealing Tony's money and letting him leave was not out of his big heart.

It's like the guy who stole the girl from her fiancée forgives the fiancée for being angry. The guy doesn't have the high ground to forgive someone. It is the fiancée who has the high ground.

Yes Tony and Natasha would have gotten rough but it was her choice to con him. I mean he wasn't forcing her to marry him and he wasn't cheating on her either. Regardless of his life and family, Tony didn't treat her bad to deserve to be betrayed.

<<-- Mess With The Best, Die Like The Rest -->>

reply

Wait, wait. When they fled, they stole nothing. Tony and his dad lied to the police that J. and N stole a million dollars from the casino, motivating the police to chase after the fleeing couple. The police thought they had a real crime on their hands. Also, journalists followed their story with zeal, as if it was a real crime. A bride leaving her fiance is neither a crime nor is it news. That's the betrayal by Tony and his dad.

So, later, J and N. thought, "hey, everybody thinks we stole their money, let's ask for a ransom and take their money" That, of course, was a crime, adding to their despair and loss of hope and, therefore, the suicides. J committed more crimes by mowing down a lot of people, adding to his list of crimes and MORE despair.

As far as "deserving to be betrayed", I hope you are of the opinion that she, like any woman, can leave her to-be husband before the wedding and such departure is not "betrayal". Therefore, the malice was ALL Tony's and his dad's. Their lie resulted in N's bank account being frozen, people hurt, and cars crashing. That blame is all to be placed on Tony and his dad's shoulders.

reply

As far as "deserving to be betrayed", I hope you are of the opinion that she, like any woman, can leave her to-be husband before the wedding and such departure is not "betrayal".


Wait... let me get this straight. If a guy leaves his wife or fiancée for another woman, it is considered as wrongdoing but what J and Natasha did was ok since they were in love? What kind of logic is that? They wanted to marry into the rich family which was the whole starting point for this.

That blame is all to be placed on Tony and his dad's shoulders.


If J and Natasha didn't plan to marry into money, this whole story wouldn't have happened. The blame should be on those who were trying to con the family for their own selfish reasons. Instead of working and earning their living, they CHOSE to marry a rich family.

Tony and his dad lied to the police that J. and N stole a million dollars from the casino, motivating the police to chase after the fleeing couple. The police thought they had a real crime on their hands. Also, journalists followed their story with zeal, as if it was a real crime. A bride leaving her fiance is neither a crime nor is it news. That's the betrayal by Tony and his dad.


Yes Tony and his father lied to the police so that they can get the police to find them. But what J and Natasha did would have been a big news since the family was a rich casino owner family and bride and future son-in-law running away together will be a sensation news which will be a disgrace for the family.

My point is, J and Natasha betrayed their future spouses by first pretending to love them and then running away together and disgracing their family name. So Tony and his father had the rights to be pissed off and wanting revenge.

<<-- Mess With The Best, Die Like The Rest -->>

reply


"Tony and his father had the rights to be pissed off and wanted revenge? WHAT!? The "right"? What? Sure he had the "right to be mad" and the "right to seek revenge" but his morals and upbringing should have led him to lick his wounds and move on (good therapy?). Instead he immaturely heads down the road with goons and guns.

Let's recap. Without the lie by Tony and Tony's dad, it would have been casino thugs chasing the couple, not cops with their unbounded resources and the help from the public due to the publicity. Query would there have been ANY publicity for the spurned groom? TONY is the one who was motivated to squelch the embarrassing occurrence, not spread the news.

Now, let's say the papers and internet blasted the story for days and days. Would Tony's family be "disgraced", as you put it? Is it really a "disgrace" to a family that their son is spurned prior to his wedding? What society? Where? What decade or point in history? 2010? If you can define a time or truly believe that would happen in 2010, isn't that a conclusion that is cultural? I would submit that some cultures would say it's MORE disgraceful to marry someone you don't love and therefore hurt everyone including any children that are later born. (PS: J wasn't engaged .. the "future spouse" angle doesn't apply to J. He did shallowly accept the gifts from his girlfriend and the vehicle for being a casino employee, I agree. Don't forget he left the vehicle.)

I think the director and screenplay writers did a good job of portraying doubts and angst in both N and J's minds -- basically, "the upcoming marriage isn't right, J leading Tony's sister on also isn't right." Notwithstanding doubts, even after J and N's lovely evening together, N decided to marry Tony and J left the apartment. She is anguished but when J comes back, it's only to bring her purse.

Then, Tony barges in, J. hides. Tony is abusive. As J and N flee and head down the road, many scenes portrayed each of their doubts about the future. For quite awhile, neither J nor N was certain they'd be together as a couple. That developed as time went on and as Tony kept up his pursuit. They only had each other to rely on. With the forged passports, I think they thought they thought they could get away from Tony. They had money and could have gone anywhere, even India. But foolish macho Tony forged on.

The story holds together pretty well, I think. I saw it twice. The long version.


"Enjoy life. This is not a dress rehearsal."

reply

but his morals and upbringing should have led him to lick his wounds and move on (good therapy?). Instead he immaturely heads down the road with goons and guns.


Really? You think a person like Tony who was brought up to not let anyone take advantage of him (casino rules) sit back and lick his wounds instead of seeking retribution?

Let's recap. Without the lie by Tony and Tony's dad, it would have been casino thugs chasing the couple, not cops with their unbounded resources and the help from the public due to the publicity. Query would there have been ANY publicity for the spurned groom? TONY is the one who was motivated to squelch the embarrassing occurrence, not spread the news.


Yes. I never said that Tony and his dad aren't the ones who brought in the cops. But the reason for them going after these two were because they started the whole thing by getting involved with the rich people for money. As Natasha said, she created the accident purposely to make Tony fall for her. He didn't seek her out. She made him the mark. And J after rejecting Gina, realized that she was a rich girl and went after her just so he can be rich.

Would Tony's family be "disgraced", as you put it? Is it really a "disgrace" to a family that their son is spurned prior to his wedding? What society? Where? What decade or point in history? 2010? If you can define a time or truly believe that would happen in 2010, isn't that a conclusion that is cultural?


It's a pride thing. Imagine a casino owner's family was embarrassed by two people they accepted into their family by running away together. Their society will blame the son and daughter. They will be pointed out and laughed at. We have that happening in schools where IF a popular girl/boy gets dumped by their significant other, the person who got dumped gets sympathy looks and talks or talks like "there must have been something wrong with him/her". Especially since J and Natasha are not around, Tony and Gina will be the target by the media and public.

J wasn't engaged .. the "future spouse" angle doesn't apply to J.


Yes but he was accepted into the family as if he was engaged. Maybe not officially but he was there for the family portrait pictures and so on.

I think you are missing my point here. J and Natasha created the situation by making Tony and Gina as their marks to get rich. Then they took off together not because they felt wrong for their actions but because of what they were feeling for one another. Tony or Gina didn't force Natasha and J. I mean Tony didn't force himself on Natasha or Gina didn't use her daddy's thugs to threaten J to get involved with her. So in that, Tony and Gina are innocent victims. While Gina sat back and cried, Tony was angered and wanted revenge. His methods may be wrong but he had just reasons for wanting revenge.

Seriously though. If a significant other of yours took off with your brother/sister's partner, would you feel angry and betrayed or would you say "live a happy life" and sit in a therapist office? Given that Tony was brought up not to let someone con him (conversation with his father), he would be thinking of revenge at any cost.

<<-- Mess With The Best, Die Like The Rest -->>

reply

This has been a productive dialogue. Looking at it from the screenwriter's point of view, the choice of a casino's son made sense because another man, if evolved, would get drunk, get his buddies together, cruise around, and find another woman. Similarly, they had to show both J and N as weak, mercenary, and way too smitten with a life neither had nor could have. In the end, they both realized it. Thus, the sweetsy family scenes at the wedding, etc. So, lots of human stuff going on.

I do hope you agree that Tony went a Little . . . Too . . . Far . . . ya think?

Last, my perspective might be a little naive. I've lived through six decades, over three as a lawyer, and seen wackos like Tony waaaaay too often. But, I've also seen lots and lots of strides in attitudes as those 30 years have gone by. I was hoping you weren't a throw back, i.e., I was hoping you didn't truly believe that Tony was justified in his actions.

"Enjoy life. This is not a dress rehearsal."

reply

To clarify, I'm not saying Tony's actions were right or that he had the justification to kill them. What I was saying was that he was reacting as how a person would in that situation. It is not justifiable but understandable.

He is not an evil person who liked some girl that refused him and therefore wanted to kill her and her lover. He was a betrayed fiancée who seeked revenge for his humiliation and heartbreak. I doubt there are many people in this world who won't feel betrayed when their significant other dumps them and run away with another. Most people will react with anger and drink their sorrows. Tony reacted in the way he was taught to (seeing how his father educated him with casino rules).

<<-- Mess With The Best, Die Like The Rest -->>

reply


I'm with you dude ..
J and N came across like a couple of *beep* opportunists !
I wished them both dead

I hurt people, thats my job !

reply

@Plague

Sorry, but the average person dosen't gather up his whole family AND the whole damn Las Vegas police force to go after somebody who jilted him---that whole part of the situation was unrealistic AND way the hell over the top. All that mess was just to give the movie some tension and drama, that's all. That was just too unbelievable and crazy for me. Also, if somebody dosen't want to be with you, all the chasing them down in the world isn't going to bring them back---that was just too damn ridiculous to me,once again.

reply

Average person does not equal to Tony. He was a rich Casino owner's son. He will have a massive ego and pride compared to an average joe. So if he was jilted and embarrassed, ofcourse he will react the way he did. Most rich guys will because not only were they betrayed but they were also shamed and embarrassed in front of his family and friends.

how everything went down (chasing, finding and climax) is over the top. But the reason for it to go down is realistic. That's what I was saying.

<<-- Mess With The Best, Die Like The Rest -->>

reply