MovieChat Forums > Strangerland (2015) Discussion > My take on what was really going on ***S...

My take on what was really going on ***SPOLIERS***


EDIT: I know I wrote a bit of a novelette here, so I added a TL;DR at the bottom if you want to skip to that.

I posted this in response on another thread, but just wanted to repeat this in case anyone wouldn't see it there. I have to admit, I *hate* it when people add all these wild plot elements to a film making it more complicated than it should be, but there were so many little unexplained parts to this film, little hints and unexplained behaviors by the both the husband and the wife that really were suggesting there was more going on than meets the eye. When I first came up with this I was even thinking myself that it was a stretch, but I watched the film for a second time and doing that really convinced me that I might be on to something, it seems to fill in all the blanks. So keep an open mind reading this because it will really sound like I'm overreaching until you re-watch the film with this scenario in mind.

People that think that the dad was molesting either one or both of the kids are on to something, but they have picked entirely the wrong parent. The dad saw the kids leaving in the morning, he was watching them walk away through the window; what possible reason could he have for not just holding the information back from the police, but from his own wife; he was protecting the wife from the truth of what she had been doing to Lilly, abusing her. The mother is the one who molested Lilly, *not* the father. The dad was trying to protect his children and his wife, as he had finally figured out what has been going on, or perhaps he received that revelation when all the stuff with the school teacher went down prior to them moving to the new town. In either case, he was protecting his wife about the truth of what she been doing, but possibly had no recollection of.

And the wife was clearly had some very deep issues and showed all the signs of a sexual predator; her behaviour went waaayyy beyond a manifestation of sexual frustration, including the way she initiated sex with her husband. There are plenty of sexually frustrated woman that don't throw themselves at young boys and police officers, the whole concept of consent was completely foreign to her... that's pathology in action. Maybe it's harder for us to see that because we don't think of women as sexual predators and molesters, but there are many, many out there.

The father went to the teacher's house, and the aboriginal boy's house *desperately* wanting to find Lily there because he didn't want to accept what he had been *desperately* trying to deny what was going on in his own household, with either him finally facing the truth for the first time, or that he thought or hoped the abuse had stopped. He knew all the places where Tom had been wandering off to, he had the places marked off on a map even!, so this was a common thing. The wife also was lying to the cop about Tom's wanderings, it was the father that interjected and said it was much more common that his wife was saying and he wandered much further than the wife wanted to admit to the cop herself. She was covering something up, and there's only one thing that she would be covering up that makes any sense.

When the cop accused the husband of molestation he was genuinely disgusted and offended at the very thought that he would do something like that; his reaction was defensive, but not for himself... he was protecting his wife. Remember the one phrase from the girl's diary about the touching in the dark, "you touching me", that part. It was haunting the wife, to the point that she couldn't get it out of her head. She may have been what's referred to as "splitting" in psychology, she may have had no recollection of what she had done to her daughter, and possibly son, but with the consequence of what happened to her daughter **because** of her abusing her, the promiscuity, the disappearance, she couldn't escape the truth of the matter anymore no matter how hard she was trying to suppress it. Speaking of the diary, think of the vitriol that the daughter displayed toward the mother... if that doesn't suggest that the mother was the source of the abuse as well, I'm not sure what more evidence someone would need.

And that was the moment where she had a complete disassociative/psychotic break right before she did her Lady Godiva impersonation down Main Street, subconsciously, or perhaps even consciously if she finally admitted to herself what she had been doing, wanting to feel the shame that her act would bring in place of the shame she should have been feeling all along because of the abuse she was committing.

Think also of the scene where the husband said that Lily certainly didn't take after him. That had nothing to do with any promiscuity on his wife's part, that was after he finally realized what had been happening under his own roof, or perhaps already knew, but was trying to get his wife to admit it to herself. Whether he had just figured it out, was in partial denial, or that he had figured it out when the whole teacher-Lily sex thing exploded in their former town, that conversation was totally about his resentment of his wife for what she had done, and also trying to get her to admit what she had done. Abusers of children, especially ones that are acting our their own past abuse that could have happened to them when they were children, sometimes block out their own behavior. This isn't an unknown thing that happens, though it is rare, it isn't unheard of.

So many of the strange behaviours of both the father and the mother that were a little inexplicable, if you re-watch the movie with my scenario of what was going on under the surface, *all* those behaviors will make perfect sense. Think about how the son reacted to the mother, with fear and distrust. And think about how much more he trusted the father... the son waited until the mother had left the room even to tell the dad about Lily getting picked up. He was terrified of his mother. And think about the mother looking at herself in the mirror, putting on Lily's makeup, putting on her clothes, and obviously getting sexually aroused. If the father had, say, gone into Lily's room and started smelling or fondling her crop top to his obvious arousal... just how would the audience react to that in relation to the likelihood that he had been carrying on an inappropriate relationship with her, if even just in his own mind? Yet the mother did exactly that, and the audience doesn't connect the dots.

And above all else, remember the conversation between the wife and the older aboriginal woman... go to that part again, listen very carefully to what the old woman says to the wife, to the exact words she used. Somehow the old woman, I think the implication is through some sort of supernatural means, she knew what the woman had done, knew the denial she was in, her "splitting", and that she knew she couldn't help the woman because she was beyond any help. The wife knowing the truth of her actions would have destroyed her psychologically, and it wouldn't bring Lily back. *That* is what the old woman was talking about, not that she wasn't able to help in finding the daughter, but that she couldn't *help* the wife.

I know this seems far-fetched, and that I'm inserting plot elements out of nowhere, but seriously, watch the film again keeping this scenario in mind, that's what I did, and so, so many subtle things will pop out at you, so many behaviours of the husband, wife, and son, as well as those diary entries, and the strange one that haunted the wife so much, I think if you do that you might find that my scenario isn't quite as off-the-wall as it might seem at first glance.

TL;DR:

The mom had been molesting Lily since she was 5 until the time of the incident with the teacher when Lily was 15. It seems that she may have turned her nocturnal attentions toward Tom since the pressures she was experiencing in the new town they moved to. The mom had been either been experiencing psychological splitting, or was perhaps experiencing dissassociative breaks or fugue states when the molestation occurred, in either case, she didn't remember what she had done, though it was bubbling to the surface throughout the film up until her psychotic/dissassociative break before the incident on main street.

The father either didn't know this was occurring, or knew it had occurred in the past before the affair with the teacher, but had now realized that the wife was still at it, either with Lily again, or with Tom. This explains the otherwise inexplicable, that he didn't tell either his wife or the police that he had witnessed the kids walking away through the kitchen windows as he was having his morning coffee, and why he was doing all-night secret searches for the kids on his own, checking all of Tom's usual haunts on the special map he had marked off; he was protecting his wife from the truth of her actions because he knew it would psychologically destroy her.

reply

I think that you insights are spot on. I remember that the cop suggests that the whole town will think that her husband did the molestation. It struck me as a red herring. The town and the audience will never suspect the beautiful bashful wife as the predator. A movie like this would never just give you the answer that is the beauty of it. GREAT POST AND GREAT WORK!

Facts:

1. Mrs. Parker forced herself on her husband without consent.
2 Mrs. Parker molested a mentally incompetent young man- Birdie
3. Mrs. Parker tried to force herself on the cop.

reply

Thanks! My wife thinks my ideas are crazy, and she even tracked down an interview with the director to convince me that I'm totally wrong, haha. Although even after listening to the interview, I'm still not convinced, especially since it didn't include either of the screenwriters. Here's the interview, in case you're interested: http://www.mediafire.com/listen/9isbunclcncr6yp/200524_002.MP3

reply

So children go missing but Lilly ran away. I agree with you. So she states that the "blame game" was a big part of what the script explored? However, people were beaten, kids went missing, and there was a young girl with issues.

reply

Yeah, the director didn't really connect the dots much in that interview! And though she talks like it was her script, she didn't even get a story credit on it, let alone anything on the script. Some of the critic reviews I've read seem to agree with our take, too, and one even made the comment that the director at times didn't seem to understand the scenes she was directing, so maybe there was a bit of a disconnect between her and the two screenwriters?

One critic review in particular said the plot led the viewer to believe first that one of the many men Lily was sleeping with had taken her, then that the father had both molested her and was also the cause of her disappearance, and finally that the mother was the molester/kidnapper/murderer, but in the end with Lily having just left in an unknown person's car that the point kind of became moot.

They also pointed out something that I hadn't thought of, how completely insane it would have been for Lily to just leave her younger brother to die out in that wasteland all by himself; she may have had some major issues, but nothing in her character portrayed her as being that callous, especially with the affection she'd shown her brother in the video the mom watched later and in the earlier scenes with both of the children together.

reply

I had thought of that as well and why would Tom not just start walking back? I can understand Tom being found in bad shape but he would tried to walk back at some point?

reply

[deleted]

You're probably right... but it just had so many otherwise inexplicable actions on the part of both parents, I couldn't resist shoe-horning in some theory that made half-a$$ sense of it. It liked it, too, but I have to admit, the novelty of ambiguous endings that really seemed to take off after Inception is starting to feel less like audience participation and more like lazy screenwriting. As a bit of an author myself a good emotionally-satisfying ending is the most difficult part of story writing, but is also the biggest payoff. Thanks for the input!

reply

[deleted]

I will agree on the Aboriginal/Celtic mysticism. I will grant the whole mother earth bigger than humanity aspect of the movie. It was shot is such away that is one conclusion that you could have. Definitely bleak.

However, Lilly was abused and most likely Tom was as well. The only constants are the parents during their lives hence one of them or both could have abused the children. For various reasons I side with OP in terms of his Pedo-Mommy theories.

In the final analysis I must conclude that the Scriptwriters and certainly the Director wanted to recreate the feeling of the parents where the children go missing. They simply just do not know. Not Knowing is central to this movie.

So here is my take, Lilly and Tom were both molested by Mommy dearest. Dad begins to understand that his wife is sick and loses interest in her. Lilly finally seduces "helpless" teacher and the creates a stink. Dad beats the teacher and everyone agrees to let it go. Sort of?

The Teachers wife gets him to call Lilly for old times sake. They meet in the desert Lilly gets in the car and leave Tommy boy in the dust. Wifey dearest jumps out from the back seat and murders Lilly. The land will eventually swallow Lilly up and know will ever know. Closure!

reply

I really liked where they were going with the aboriginal angle, it reminded me a bit of Peter weir's "The Last Wave", too, and was hoping they'd go further in that direction, exploring the idea of "The Dreaming" or more about the Rainbow Serpent, too. When it ended up the Lily just left in a car it was a little bit of a letdown... but I supposed the car wasn't ruled out as a supernatural manifestation entirely either.

I completely agree with all the other things you've written, great insights!

reply

I don't buy the mother molested the daughter theory at all, there's literally no evidence to support it.

The father letting the children go: he said when he confessed to the wife that he saw it happen that he felt angry towards them (and this was obvious in the early scenes) so he just let them go. He didn't mention it to anyone because he was ashamed of feeling that way and from the beginning he believed it was the same as before and that the daughter had run away to be with some guy and they would find her quickly.

The wife obviously did have sexual issues but she was grieving she was craving being touched and comforted something she was not getting from her cold and distant husband (even after they had sex he orgasmed quickly and then did nothing to help her leaving her frustrated). Also it makes no sense that you would assume she was a pedophile because she tried to initiate sex with three adult men??? That isn't the same thing at all.

Also I think you way misinterpreted the scene between the grandmother and the mother outside the grocery story. Catherine was desperate at that point she was seeking a mystical explanation and answer. The old woman shut her down and told her there just wasn't one and that kids sometimes disappear. It was actually a good take down of the "Magical negro" trope.

I think you're taking the suggestion that Lily was molested in really weird ways. Ultimately I think it was either a red herring or if it was long-term something that happened by someone who wasn't in the family if it happened at all (I still believe that the relationship with the teacher accounts for her overly sexual behaviour). Remember that the person who thought she was molested was Hugo Weaving's character who never actually met Lily in person. Catherine ran with the suggestion because she was terrified at that point and her husband was acting in a way that was incomprehensible to her.

reply

Also it makes no sense that you would assume she was a pedophile because she tried to initiate sex with three adult men???
Mrs. Parker initiated sex with a very young man with a 'cognitive disability' and this is form of rape.

Rape

A criminal offense defined in most states as forcible sexual relations with a person against that person's will. Consent is a big part of the crime. Bridie could not really consent because his cognitive impairment. To put bluntly you can not have sex with people with cognitive impairments. They can not give consent and neither can minors. Furthermore, a spouse may be convicted of rape if the perpetrator forces the other spouse to have nonconsensual sex. As an footnote "Gone with the Wind" tackles this subject.

reply

Agree completely; my point remains, if the husband were shown to be a rapist/sexual predator the way the wife was, the audience would have *no* trouble *whatsoever* making the very small leap to him being capable of molestation of his minor children by sole virtue of his being a man rather than a woman. But the wife gets a complete pass. It's a really glaring double-standard.

Sexual predators don't take the feelings or emotions or wishes of others into consideration, it's part of the pathology. They are capable of absolutely anything no matter how depraved if it furthers satisfying their own sexual urges and desires because of this basic lack of human empathy and respect.

The fact that people have such a hard time accepting that Kidman's character could do such a horrendous thing despite the horrendous behavior she has on display in other scenes betrays a very sick, sick bias in our society. She didn't just "initiate contact", she sexually assaulted that mentally-challenged fellow, *and* the police officer. Consent isn't just something for men to worry about, ffs!

From Richard Roeper's review in the Chicago Sun-Times: "Catherine spirals into a zombie-like state as she obsesses over Lilly’s shocking diary, and at one point even puts on her daughter’s clothes and engages in an unbelievably sordid encounter with one of the men who was with her daughter." She was obviously sexually stimulated by her daughter's clothing before the handicapped man ever entered the scene. Again, if the father had been obviously aroused fondling Lily's clothes exactly how would a typical viewer interpret this??

Spot on again AmbitiousPawn.

reply

It is the problem of beauty and specifically beautiful woman. Ted Bundy was such a shocker because he was great looking and highly intelligent which made it hard correlate him the abhorrent behavior. Beautiful people always get a pass. This is actually a psychosocial phenomenon which well known and manipulated daily in advertising.

Putting Beauty back in the box, we are simply asked who has displayed unacceptable behavior? Not implied but actual behavior on the screen that we can point to as evidence of some pathology? Mrs. Parker tried to seduce the slow kid! If the Bridie is 18 years old and has mental age of 15 or less then Mrs. Parker was committing an act of rape or sexual assault. I think Bridie's mental age is depressed 25% which would mentally 13.5 years old. Remember that IQ is mental age divided chronological age so maybe Bridie is 14years old? RAPE! He can not consent.

reply

Here's a little more reality, literally, to inject into the discussion:

"In 2001, the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System developed by the Children's Bureau in the United States found that approximately 903,000 children were victims of maltreatment, and 10 per cent of them, or a little more than 90,000 were sexually abused. In these approximately 90,000 cases it was found that 59 per cent of the perpetrators of the abuse were women and 41 per cent were men, statistics that reflect international findings."

So women sexually abusing children isn't the odd case, it's by *far* the norm, with men acting as abusers being a considerably rarer occurrence. And yet, I would bet anything at all that the average person off the street would believe the exact opposite to be true despite all the gathered evidence pointing to the contrary. Why?

The problem of beauty as you explained it is probably much to blame for this, as well as those bizarre double-standards that have unfortunately been on full display in the comments section for this film, where consent is a completely foreign concept when a woman's quest for sexual gratification is at stake.

The sexual abuse I suffered myself, which occurred between the ages of 2 or 3 until 6 years of age, was perpetrated by a completely normal looking, in fact quite attractive, normal acting teenaged girl who was our family's babysitter, starting when she was 13 or 14 to 17... about the last person on Earth that we'd expect, even though statistics clearly show that she was exactly the person we should *most* expect.

The abuse finally ended when she made the mistake of performing oral sex on me in the presence of one of her friends that luckily for me recognized it for the aberrant behavior it was. My parents dealt with it quietly, I guess they thought it was for the best of all involved, and it was 1976 so a very different time as well.

We live in a sick society, and women aren't immune to this sickness of being sexual predators and molesters of children in particular, and in far greater numbers than men, and unfortunately, it's innocent children that are suffering because of the blinders we collectively, inexplicably, choose to put on.

reply

That is always the problem when a stereotype behavior it is contradiction of sorts. My favorite example of "stereotype behavior blindness" is Female Spousal abuse. This where the man gets beaten and the woman gets a pass. According to a source is completely under reported. I would mention emotion and verbal abuse but it would fall mostly of deaf ears. I suggest to look at it from a human being and behavior perspective. Mrs. Parker's behavior is a clue at best and criminal at worst. The teacher and the overage boys raped Lilly. Bridie? That is matter of consent.

reply

Only problem is that the study you quote is lumping physical and sexual abuse together in their stats. yes, women DO the greater portion of abuse, because women (at least in the US) tend to be home with the kids more and thus are subject to more frustration in terms of parenting.They are statistically more likely to haul off and hit the child when they get overwhelmed. However, the FAR greater percentage of sexual abuse happens at the hands of men. It's extremely rare for women to be the sole perpetrator of sexual abuse. They occasionally assist their partner in sexual abuse, but it's pretty rare for them to do it on their own. I used to work on a sex offender treatment team when I was in grad school.

In my opinion, you have a pretty good interpretation of the story, except that I don't necessarily agree that the mom was molesting her kids. Maybe the screenwriters intended us to think that she was, even though it's unlikely in real life (movies often go for the most intense possibility even if it's highly unlikely) but I just don't see evidence of it in the actions in the film. However, I DO think the mom was extremely unstable...unpredictable...loving at times and hostile and insane at others. And that could easily lead to emotional or physical abuse of one or both kids. I mean, we saw her shake and smack her traumatized son when he was extremely weak. And after she left the room, he told his dad that the reason he didn't tell her what he knew was because he was scared. Of mom's reaction? Possibly. Likely, in my opinion. A crazy, unpredictable mother could create such an unsafe family environment that the two kids could run away, for sure.

Also, I'm not sure that the movie intends us to see this, but often when an adolescent female is acting out in a sexually provocative manner with older men, it's less about the actions of that girl's mother, and more about the actions of her father. An emotionally distant or physically absent father can cause a young woman to seek the approval of any man, and she probably hasn't learned to value any other part of herself thanks to inconsistent parenting so she sees value in the characteristic that the men respond to first and foremost: her physical body. She learns that is the way to get men to pay attention. We don't know what her father was like before the incident with the teacher, but he was certainly emotionally (and often physically) absent during the events of the movie. And there were comments about trouble between the parents prior to the incident with the teacher, too--that Nicole Kidman was out of control when she was young too, and that her husband always seemed uncomfortable.

reply

Obviously, I don't agree with you on any of the points you made, but this film did leave an awful lot of your for interpretation, thanks for your reply.

reply

The touching in the night could also just be the daughter exploring herself and her sexual awakening. Also if the wife was a molester, would she really give the book to the cop?

I didn't see the wife as molester of the girl but there are certainly parallels with their sexual urges, and use of sex as an emotional outlet, remembering the husband several times mentions her loose past when they were younger.

reply

I do not believe that the wife is aware of what she has done. Repressed memories?

reply

I think she cried when reading the book because she recognised the daughter was going through the same mental and emotional strain she did which is why we see her get drunk and dress up like the daughter/herself as a young teen and the attempted seduction of the Aboriginal boy was part of the role play.

Most of us know women like this.... part loving the attention from men but also loathing it and the lack of real, lasting and honest intimacy they receive.



I just think the molestations theories are stretching.

reply

attempted seduction of the Aboriginal boy
You forgot the part where the boy was retarded. Therefore unable to give consent as a result a rape. Yep! Double face palm.

reply

Come on, she was drunk and in a bad mental state and he showed up. There is no way she deliberately preyed upon him cause he was also slow. That's just reading too much into the scene.

reply

If you had drunk sex with a minor it would still be a problem. Being drunk is not an excuse. You drive drunk and kill somebody there are still laws and victims. She gets drunk and get to have sex with a retard? She is sexually frustrated and can rape her hubby? She can make strong aggressive passes at the cop in charge of investigating your child disappearance. Why are all the scenes there? Are they just random fillers or are they clues about her character?

reply

The Op brought up molestation of the Daughter. my point is there is Zero evidence of this. She was screwed up and was obviously keeping a lid on her inner self for a long time, that's all.

reply

there was no evidence of sexual abuse. the movie is about parents dealing with missing children.

Richard Roeper is just a useless critic. no one cares what he thinks

reply

You've made good observations. This crossed my mind when I saw the movie. Thank you for flushing it out.

reply

Bravo! I had to sign in just to say 'Yes!" Yours is by far the best explanation, and the most logical. Excellent interpretation! There was always something so strange about the mother's behaviour, but I just didn't want to admit that perhaps she was the molester--but as the show went on it seemed the father was by far the more normal of the two, and it couldn't just be chalked up to her grieving for her childrens' disappearance.

She was definitely the one with sexual issues.

reply

Thanks for the long explanation, but I think you are completely wrong.

Even more thanks for the link to the interview with the director, as that was really conclusive for me. It is also really big of you to provide "evidence" that does not support your point of view. I like that, it shows you would like to understand, a researcher at heart.

The director mentions how some people react to stress and uncertainty in a sexual way or workaholic ways and she wanted to depict this. So the sexuality of the wife was something else altogether, response to stress.

I think it much more likely that the father touched her in the dark, and that this was the one moment he would like to take back. The wife also mentions that the sex between them disappeared on the day Lily went naked and that the husband was upset by this. In short, he sees his beautiful daughter naked, gets hung up on her, starts touching her in the dark and loses sexual interest in his wife. Remember the first scene were he is uncomfortable about his daughter being scantily dressed and all that violence regarding his daughter.

reply