Williams' and Baker's characters:
She just stands by while her obnoxious, narcissistic husband sleeps around. And then she, not he, becomes depressed and guilt ridden. He simply mopes about, while continuing to hate himself.
Why shouldn't the audience despise them both for being so gratingly pathetic? This film defines the difference between sympathetic characters and simply pathetic ones.
Williams' and Baker's characters:
She just stands by while her obnoxious, narcissistic husband sleeps around. And then she, not he, becomes depressed and guilt ridden. He simply mopes about, while continuing to hate himself.
"You understood virtually nothing about it"
You are good at being mindlessly contrarian, but you fail to make any sort of point that relates to my post. The characters are absolutely pathetic. Do you not agree? If not, then explain how they are more or less than pathetic.
You are good at being mindlessly contrarian, but you fail to make any sort of point that relates to my post.
Now that you bring it to my attention, the inability his character has to ACT ON ANY RECOGNIZABLE HUMAN IMPULSE underlines his pathetic nature. He has no problem betraying his wife emotionally, but he is too much of a coward to realize who or what he is (i.e. homosexual). People this vacant don't actually exist.
Nevermind, though. What is truly cathartic is that you snatched up the bait like a dog in heat. You are an incorrigible blow hard.
You weren't watching the movie carefully at all. Joy married Nolan because they wouldn't have to have a fully consummated marriage, simply companionship. Her line at the end that she didn't want to live in the real world says this. Nolan doesn't sleep with Leo. And he doesn't betray Joy emotionally. That's the whole reason he's never intimate with Leo. I'm assuming you watched the whole movie?
shareI have come to the conclusion the OP doesn't understand the english language well or has misunderstood the definition of several claims he/she has made. First off, NOTHING Williams character does in this film is narcissistic. NOTHING. Almost the polar opposite. Secondly, the other poster you mention was arguing nothing "contrarian" to what you posted. A contrarian is someone who has a pattern of doing or saying the opposite of what someone or some group else is doing or saying for the sake of being different, not because of actual differing belief. Or someone who bucks a trend simply because it is a trend can also be considered a contrarian to some degree.
shareWhy shouldn't the audience despise them both for being so gratingly pathetic? This film defines the difference between sympathetic characters and simply pathetic ones.