So only rich white middle class families know how to bring up kids right? Or maybe, just maybe the message is that rich white middle class do-gooders should mind their own business but I doubt it. All I know is that rich or poor it isn't right to go around kidnapping peoples' children.
shareThe first one.
shareI know right. Because everything that is depicted on screen in a film is always condoned by the creators: I am equally offended by films like the Texas Chain Saw Massacre, that say it's okay to slaughter a van full of young adults and eat them. I'm teasing of course.
Just because Biel's character is the "protagonist" of the film doesn't mean the writer/director wants people to think what she's doing is a good thing. Actions were left intentionally grey. In fact, the ending sort of bashes you over the head with the idea that things aren't so clear-cut for anybody involved.
Take The Sopranos, for example. A show centered almost entirely around a thief/killer and his equally vile family and friends. Of course the creators don't want people to think that the characters' lifestyle is how real people should live.
My IMDb lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur5570856/lists?ref_=nv_usr_lst_3
I agree with you. It's a film. However there is a slight uneasiness I get with this subtle questioning of what's right and wrong. This is a real, ongoing debate. Biel is beautiful and sophisticated which in Hollywood speak makes her "right". The chainsaw massacre people are obviously the bad guys because they're crazy, unkempt and dislikeable. And there's no questioning whether they are right or wrong. They're just wrong. I believe she was wrong but some people would say yes take those kids out of that loser existence.
Canada did the "60′s Scoop", taking native kids away from their families sometimes without consent because the government thought they'd have a better life. That certainly didn't work out.
I'm also am personally invested in this message because I have an adopted daughter. I know very little about where she came from and will also wonder if her parents were pressured by the idea of Nirvana for their kids by do-gooders. I am incredibly grateful to have my daughter but I also feel no matter what the conditions, a child that is loved will probably prosper. Was she denied that? I'm uneasy about the real message it proposes socially. There are people who think whatever they do is right regarding kids when the love of a parent is all a kid needs. It turns my blood cold to think of the arrogance of some people regarding children so I stand by my thread title. If one believes she was right, this is a horrible message, in my opinion. But I also understand if someone feels otherwise.
I, for one, do not think that Biel and her cohorts were right. The only child "transfer" I was remotely on board with was Jodelle Ferland's character because she actively sought to be relocated. All of the other children had no say in the matter and were taken by force from their parents, without the knowledge of the parents. What Biel and her team should have been doing is working harder to help the community improve as a whole and not just smuggling the kids away.
To say that the film has a horrible message, though, is implying that its message is straightforwardly portraying Biel's actions as commendable. The only way the film could have conveyed this message is if the biological parents were shown to be happy without their children, the children were unquestioningly happy in their new homes and everyone lived happily ever after. Instead, we see the parents suffering over the loss of their children and it's heart-wrenching stuff. Unlike parents who willingly put their children up for adoption, these parents had no idea if their children, who they raised beyond infancy, were even still alive.
So don't be so paranoid! You sound like a good/concerned/involved parent, and your little girl is lucky to have you. My boyfriend was adopted as an infant and has never had any desire to track down his birth parents, much less wonder if he belonged with them all along (and his adoptive dad isn't even that great, although, his mom is a doll). He's in his thirties and considers his adoptive parents to be his real parents, despite any shortcomings. All children are different, but unless you're planning on not loving your daughter and with-holding affection from her, you don't have to worry about her growing up without her (potentially) loving biological parents. I highly doubt she was smuggled away from them and into your arms. Rest easy 😉
My IMDb lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur5570856/lists?ref_=nv_usr_lst_3
That's sweet. Thanks!
shareOf course. I'm sorry if I sounded hostile at all in my first post. I'm just growing tired of reading threads on imdb where people don't even attempt to analyze or digest a film before ripping it to shreds. I assumed you were doing the same. You have shown that you are more than capable of thought and discussion, however, so I obviously jumped the gun with my original snarky comments!
My IMDb lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur5570856/lists?ref_=nv_usr_lst_3
You didn't come over like that. I have a tendency to try and pack my titles with some punch or controversy/sarcasm so I'm not surprised if they rub people the wrong way and if you have reacted like that I would have understood. But I really appreciate your clarification. I am used to being ripped to shreds sometimes!!!
shareut I also feel no matter what the conditions, a child that is loved will probably prosper
I seen it like a Cinderella story. I used to wish another family would take me from mine. There was not physical or sexual abuse, but constant chronic verbal abuse and neglect. My parents were also lower middle class and had their issues and fights.
I did feel sorry for the red haired mom, because although she was dirt poor, she did seem to be nurturing. That's what children need more than anything. But when money is tight to nonexistent it stresses most people out where they can't be the nurturing parent they planned to be at one time.
When I was in the hospital at 18 years old from a suicide attempt, I remember hearing my father yelling "how much is this going to cost me?"
So from my perspective, the message I seen was different. And I seen a happy ending for those children.
In a capitalist world you would be better off living in a rich or at least middle class family.
We(indirectly) brought this upon ourselves. The message is absolutely horrific to our minds now, but try to imagine a society without families, where children are being nurtured and educated by a specially appointed custodians(machines even), yes no such thing as father or mother would exists in such a society. They say a eusocial society is the top of social evolution. Technically the bees and ants are more evolved than us, again as a society. If you would see around you will notice that all we care about is surviving and succeeding in life. The self help books will tell you how to live, how to work and love to be socially acceptable. The Nazis were on track, but they lacked the technology and patience. Now all this is available and then some.
The only other way is the way back. Back the way we came from, and that is a very hard question because we don't really know where we came from, nor do we know where are we going, all we know is what we are being told. One thing I know for sure, money can't give you more individuality. But anyway, this path will never be chosen, not before we reach the assumed top.
Some say that what we experience is actually devolution i.e. evolution of matter.
Remember, you cannot change the world, but you can change your world.
It is not about the money or social status it is about people who really want children ,and parents that are willing to put their personal life on hold to raise and child. The movie showed how the towns people watch their children by not watching them, the children were dirty playing with glass bottles. Both of the girls were abused even though kid napping is wrong , the new parents could be just as poor, as the first family and raise the child much better.
shareYou know it isn't true so who gives a *beep*.
shareSince the movie is not an afterschool special, I doubt it was seeking to teach a "message" to anyone. But if you're looking for one, "care for your children" isn't a bad one I'd say.
And they never said anything about rich or poor. She said the kids were growing up broken because their parents were. What broke them wasn't poverty, it was the feeling they had failed. Despair makes people crumble, rich or poor.
The families they were given to weren't necessarily rich. You can't assume that from one person. They were just people who really wanted children. Not just people who had gotten drunk and ended up being parents.
For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco