MovieChat Forums > Stoic (2010) Discussion > Spoiler! Can't understand Jack and Harry...

Spoiler! Can't understand Jack and Harry's lack of remorse


I saw this movie a couple of weeks ago, but its the kind of movie that definitely stick to you! I just can't get over the fact that both Harry and Jack felt no remorse at all for what they did, while Peter was literally having a break down. Even when Jack rapped Mitch and then Harry abused him, they just sat and watched Tv after, like it was nothing. I noticed before when Jack was forcing Mitch to eat his vomit, after Harry showed him sympathy, then does something so horrible to him. I know this film is also portraying how group dynamics work, the psychology of criminals, but to have so little background about the prisoners, it doesn't make scene. I know i'm going a little over the top, but i'd like people opinions about their behavior.

reply

To me they seemed like sociopaths.

www.myspace.com/sofewwithbrains

reply

I'm drunk and this is a rant... I hope this makes sense to people who are sober.

The way I see it, the behavior of the individuals in response to what is happening sort of Uwe Boll's way to lead the viewer to evaluate themselves, and how their judgments are formed. Though the characters all hold equal blame in what is happening, how they respond to those actions causes the viewer to rate them on a totem pole and judge them separately. An essential point of the film, I think, is to point out the bull *beep* that goes along with appointing blame in accordance with actions over involvement.

You have Peter who is the most sympathetic because in his interviews he seems to demonstrate the most regret, and as the events play out he seems to represent the less extreme part of the group dynamic. But he was the one who wouldn't let it rest after the initial beating and degradation, it could have stopped there. He made the nasty drinks right afterward, then later he pissed in the toilet scrub holder and poured it on Mitch's face. But most importantly, he was the one who suggested the act murder in the first place, because of his own selfish fears. This is THE definitive and final evil of the film, but because of how the story is told we sympathize with his character more than Jack or Harry. When the viewer sees his remorse, it's human nature to then judge him accordingly.

With Jack, you have some one who rapes and beats a man, but in the interviews shows regret and denies involvement, but because of his actions the viewer is able to see that his confessions are bull. This causes the viewer to place him on a different level of despicably than Peter, even though he is no more or less responsible for the events that took place. In some ways, his denial of responsibility and the way he feigns regret makes him the most despicable of all. There is no actual regret on his part, he simply doesn't want his acts to be seen as evil as they truly are.

Harry is the sociopath of the group, he isn't the strongest but he at least thinks that he makes up for it by being the smartest. He refuses to admit to his acts and the events that occur, and when confronted with those truths he then refuses to show remorse and instead makes snarky comments. Like Jack he doesn't feel any regrets, but unlike him it's not because he doesn't want to be seen as evil, it's simply because he wants so badly to go unpunished for his actions. He feels like he's smart enough to win out in the end if he plays it cool, and when it's too late for that, *beep* it... no use pretending he feels bad about it. This could either lead the viewer to judge him as the most despicable because of his calculatingly evil behavior, or a peg below Jack because at least he isn't pretending to feel bad about it.

I feel like Stoic tries to call into question how we as people place blame and responsibility not only in the events we participate in, but events we observe as well. 3 characters all took part in the same crime and share the same responsibility for what occurred, but at the end we feel differently about each one.

This is your comment, you may delete or edit it.

reply

i couldn't have said it better myself & yes. it made sense. i definitely think peter, though the most sympathetic, got the sentence he deserved. the last scene that shows them as friends makes me think that he was just as evil as the other 2 because he sat there & watched it happen to some one he was supposed to be friends with. the other 2 are animals, but this peter was the one who gave idea to save him self.

reply

[deleted]

Well said good sir! You really nailed it.

OZ is the best show ever... EVER!

reply

Excellent synopsis of the events. Peter is the least evil as I see it, because the other two performed the most dispicable of acts..rape, while Peter didnt. Peter felt remorse, the other two did not. This at least shows Peter has a soul. Harry made me really angry with the broom actions...worse even than the rape by Jack, and I don't understand his sentence..He should have gotten the death penalty or at the very least maximum sentence with no parole. The fact that Jack & Harry will get out one day is disturbing. If someone can be this cruel to a person they are not a proper human being but something rather dark looms inside them.

reply

the short answer is. Jack and Harry were true maniacs who only cared about themselves


Rob Zombie is one of the greatest directors today

reply