Whose side are you on?

<Spoilers ahead>

Pumpkin, I disagree.

I would say, as a couple, the Longstreets are superior at pretty much anything, whether it is raising children, handling their liquor, or most other things.

The Cowans couldn't even follow the basic rules of etiquette: as a guest, you FIRST get drunk, and only THEN throw up all over the living room. The sequence of those things makes a huge difference: in one case, it is mildly entertaining and funny for the whole group, but in this case it spoiled the mood and ruined everybody's day.

That said, I probably liked Alan a bit more than Michael, but I thought Penelope was clearly the most likable of the bunch. But as I said, as a couple, it is the Longstreets all the way. Let's face it, one couple is raising a normal, even popular kid, while the other couple have raised what seems like a violent psychopath in the making (even the dad himself thinks the kid is a maniac). One couple are productive members of society who work to make the world a better place, while the other couple are involved in what can be seen like questionable, if not harmful, kind of work. Eventually, you get to see why the Cowan kid turned out the way he did; good thing his dad is a lawyer - the kid will probably be in a dire need of a lawyer eventually.

For me, it is no contest, really.

I'm on the hamster's side

We all had fights when teenagers and then became friends again with our "enemies". And that's actually the end of the movie, the kids getting along. The parents making a fuzz about NOTHING.

All the characters had observed SOME part of the truth, yet remained blinded to the observed truth of the other side - the way it gradually escalated was superb. I myself am a recovering 'Michael' type - the over-feminized white knight martyr with a histrionic, neurotic busy body 'Penelope' type mother, trying to make everyone 'happy' without facing the genuine emotion of rage and disempowerment lurking just under the surface. Though his ethics are questionable, Alan's observations of how the world is essentially at 'war', and how him and Michael first come to blows and then relax over a glass of whiskey, is far more agreeable than the false friendship and empty, actionless moral superiority that the women engage in. One great quote I once read said how (paraphrased) 'women are taught two things as children: your friends will stick by you forever, and that they can viciously turn on you in a petty fashion'. Penelope was the most immature of the lot, and Alan the most conservative and 'sensible' but heartless. None of them without ignorance - and arrogance to their own point of view.
There's a terrific book out called 'The 33 Strategies of War' by Robert greene, that goes into the subtle social strategies that individuals, couples, businesses, and governments and countries, use to gain the upper emotional hand in their personal transactions - one person almost always has a stronger position at any one time. I myself follow a spirituality that deals with energy forms in much the same way - there is always an opposing force from some direction, with some energetic investment, that you must meet head on, in order to equalize or overcome it. In the interpersonal situations here, where everyone has an investment in their own fevered, perpetually incomplete egos, there is no *actual* communication. I actually can't remember the time where a social situation I was involved in DIDN'T have an aspect of fevered ego - and is why I have largely avoided most social contact!
And of course...the irony here is the hamster is fine, and the boys make up!!

The most important thing you need to know...
Is that you don't know sh!t.

Alan all the way.

Penolope is a total b!tc$ btw

It seems I am a little late to the party, lol, but I too am on Nancy's (Kate Winslet) side and the Cowan's in general.

They wanted to get it over with, and they were calm and apologetic. The asked for nothing but the word "armed" to be taken out of the letter. Several times they tried to leave, yet every time Penelope would just had something else. She was like a dog with a bone. Out the door, lets bring up his teeth/ nerve damage, out the door, oh now we can say "DELIBERATELY" injured. They (Penelope and Michael...especially Penelope) just could not let it go. They were passive aggressive and it is obvious they had zero intent of calmly the matter. Penelope practically wanted Zachary to grovel to Ethan! Children don't always fully understand the extent of their wrong doing, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be punished but like all people they can't be forced to feel something they don't. Now, we have no proof of how either boy felt about the incident but we do know that Nancy was willing to bring Zachary over to apologize. She fully agreed that her son should apologize. Oh, that wasn't good enough for Penelope, she wanted to have Nancy wave a magic wand that would compel Zachary to be deeply sorry. Maybe he was, maybe wasn't, certainly he needs to apologize, be punished and his parents (not Penelope, come on she wanted to talk to him about his behaviour? Talk about inappropriate)need to have a discussion with him about his behaviour and explain how wrong it was.

Perhaps, I side with the Cowans because I find that so often in life, people won't let things go. Even om IMDB, I love discussing and exchanging ideas, but it is so aggravating when another poster just won't stop and continues to reply to you countless times on the same subject. Not just that but using words like, "if YOU watch it again"....uh, I have already said I have seen the movie many times. Even if you nicely tell the individual that it seems we have interpreted things differently and that you just don't share their opinion, so maybe it would be best to just leave it, they don't leave it. They are superficially respectful of your opinion, but don't expect them to stop, no as they are leaving (well pretending to leave) they must again tell you what they think and they think. Are they waiting for someone to say "OMG!! You are so right! Hallelujah, I see the light"? Do they need that validation? Isn't it enough to simply say, we have different views (that is fine) but mine isn't changing and neither is yours, lets end this circular conversation?

I could go on but this post is already long enough. It comes down to understanding how irritating it is when someone won't stop and regardless of how nice you are they continue and so does their passive aggressive posts that serve no purpose. I won't even get started on the posts that state "You're wrong....", makes my blood boil, unless they wrote and directed the damn thing then they have no idea who(if anyone on IMDB) has the 100% correct interpretation.


So sorry for the rant, :P

[deleted]

I am like Alan, except I fake being nicer within a professional setting. And I like him the most. And Nancy next, I suppose.

If you are going to be a selfish bastard, then just be one. Don't apologise and don't deny it. It is our entitlement to be a selfish bastard.