MovieChat Forums > Relatos salvajes (2014) Discussion > The comparison to murder in one scene is...

The comparison to murder in one scene is a little or even a lot, err, too extreme.

posted 3 years ago by TheMan18 (12480)
18 replies | jump to latest

In the bit where that guy was trying to reclaim his vehicle, he correctly pointed out that he did not see a line being painted there to say "no parking" allowed and apparently it wasn't...

And when that guy in the car recovery center tells him "If you say you didn't know murder was illegal", I actually became angry and even a little confused, and he should've been. If someone told ME that, I would go helluva mad, really.

First of all, that's a totally different scenario.

I also like to think that murder of an innocent person is horrible and wrong NOT JUST for it being illegal, i.e. against the law, as such, but also because, the victim in it loses their entire life.

And its in a totally different ballpark morally as well.

Besides, the line there was not even painted properly, and instead of taking it into consideration, the guy was like "Oh its all your fault blah blah blah" but suggesting also the case is in any way similar to murder, that was extreme, to put it bluntly.

Hell, if someone under these circumstances told me that I would spend half an hour reading them a lecture on morality and how the taking of a life and something like this are, including MORALLY, totally DIFFERENT matters, one wouldn't JUST get away with it comparing me to a potential murderer, and trivializing a serious crime AND morally bankrupt deal as the premeditated killing of another person like that by arguing "If you didn't know LEGALLY..."

Seriously, what did you think of this part?

reply

[–] StoneKeeper (21038) a year ago

The employee exaggerated the comparison to make his point.

If you didn’t know, you couldn’t park there and you still do it, It’s on you.
All the same, if a person doesn’t know you can’t murder someone else and they do it, It’s on them too.

I’m perplexed that’s all you had to say about this masterpiece.

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

Well, its a very good film yes but I was addressing one scene.

And I get that he meant to say its on him its just that he went about it rather insultingly and over the top extreme in my opinion.

Besides, that driver claimed the line wasn't painted so it was IMPOSSIBLE to see it and as a result, could he not have claimed for instance that the sign wasn't even there?

And on a slightly different note. Yes of course we're all responsible for our actions no doubt. But what I also was wondering was, don't most if not all people who commit murder outright KNOW its wrong even if they may still do it, and that very few if no people out there simply don't know its wrong and illegal and do it anyway (most of us are not psychos, I believe.).

And overall, was the employee right?

reply

[–] StoneKeeper (21038) a year ago

The employee was 100% wrong and you know it. It’s the whole point of the short; the world is closing in on a good guy surrounded by assholes and a broken system. It was very well done too.

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

So that complaining customer then was RIGHT?

In any case also, I still thought that his comparison to murder, whether to make a point or otherwise, was a little too extreme.

And I suppose that man should've just paid off the fine then, right? Cheers.

reply

[–] StoneKeeper (21038) a year ago

I would have taken a picture and then build myself a case to contest it. And yes, the comparison was extreme but again, that was the point; make him lose his good mind

reply

[–] asom (6503) a year ago

Reductio ad absurdum.

Yes, by greatly exaggerating the analogy it can make the point stronger. Unless you are American and offended by it.

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

"Unless you are American and offended by it."
And are Americans who are offended right? Also, why bring America into this? Not saying you're right or wrong just curious, thanks. I myself by the way am Russian but whether I am particularly offended by something or in dire disagreement I like to think I am just a human being.

"by greatly exaggerating the analogy it can make the point stronger"
I didn't really feel he made his point "stronger". Rather, it was an irritating case of someone stating the obvious and was overall rather pointless overall and mighty unprofessional of him to boot.

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

"Reductio ad absurdum."
More like - "Frustratio via obviousa" - haha. :)

P.S. Why didn't that complaining customer, already de-facto angry with him, POINT OUT TO THAT MAN that "excuse me, comparison to murder is extreme and unnecessary" here via speech? He was already angry at him for refusing and for not doing his job properly, so why not go to extra mile and say "Hey, shut up!" etc etc etc when he started saying it? Its not like he startled him with that speech, I mean, afterwards, he continued to chastise him in general for the overall situation?

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

I also couldn't help but feel that this guy working for that car towing repo company who spoke to that complaining man probably had a few issues and problems of his own.

From how he was all like "Don't talk to me like that, I'm just doing my job" angry defense/attack mechanism he used to making comparisons to "murder" to how he for instance couldn't explain that even if line wasn't properly painted like maybe to have a look at it or ask to provide evidence then say sorry but these are the rules.

But then that "customer" also came across like he had issues. And maybe he thought he was entitled but then wonder - was he that short of money too? (How EXPENSIVE was it to pay to collect his car back, several hundreds of Spanish, err, is it - pesetas?) Maybe he could've taken the case to court and also later said, "OK, I will pay off the fine" but then maybe ask or get whoever is responsible for line painting to paint it again in case it over the years lost its mark etc.

And basically, Spanish or otherwise. Was the complaining customer completely right here? Thanks.

reply

[–] asom (6503) a year ago

But that's the main thing with this movie: everyone in all the scene has issues. EVERYONE!

It's a narrative on society and human nature.

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

And then the customer goes out of his way to create home made dynamite and cause an explosion at that towing company, lol.

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

Also, how brave, or was it mad, that complaining customer was, that he was OPENLY referring to those who work in that towing company as "criminals" with a straight face and a serious voice? And did he really feel that by doing that it would make his situation better and that somehow those working there would bow to his demands?

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

And how ironic then that for all his talk of them being as criminals, he was the one that ended up committing several actual crimes like assault and vehicle explosion? Why not just pay off the fine like that?

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

If that man in the Vehicle Towing Agency REALLY wanted to make his argument STRONGER, and for that matter, more effective, convenient, truthful, honest, convincing and more sincere...

Instead of brining up the very obvious "murder" comparison and how law works in spite of anyone KNOWING IT...

He could and should've attempted to explain to the customer that, in his own words and by his own admission, the fact that the line may not have had paint in it does not automatically indicate that it is a parking zone, and that for instance there could be other features in the line that may mean one shouldn't park their vehicle there. He could've also informed him that the Vehicle Towing Agency here is a professional organization and that we know our stuff very well, and that they don't just cheat customers for their own sake and that they are professionally tied to road laws etc. And that just because the line wasn't painted and looked like it therefore WAS a parking spot is NOT THE CASE, and that, even though perhaps they are sincerely sorry that the vehicle had to be taken like that and fine was slapped, the area WAS checked etc and that there is nothing that can be done to avoid payment etc. And that if a manager WAS here (the vehicle towing agency man could've said he was busy or just not in today, and no, haha, I'm not a "president" of any sort, maybe even joke "Much as we all WISH...") he would tell him the EXACT SAME THING, same for a cop or otherwise.

He could've also maybe advised the customer to take the picture of a line ("Have you got maybe a photo of the line on your phone, could I please see it sir?") in future if there's any doubt there's something wrong and that if you believe your vehicle was wrongly taken. And even if customer got a little mad, he could've been "Please calm down sir", "no need to make a fuss etc", "I am not a criminal of any kind, in fact, I am very much FOLLOWING THE LAW", maybe even advise him on the order of "I did the best I could, a

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

and I wish it was up to me, but I really CANNOT allow our company to just compensate you for your loss and allow you to take the car without payment, that would get ME and YOU into BIGGER TROUBLE sir", "if it was up to ME alone, but sorry, we have rules and I am not entitled to just allow you to avoid payment"...

And OK, even if as a semi joke he still mentioned the murder part and the customer went "This argument is a bit off base and extreme", he could also go - "Haha, of course it is mate, I was just kidding, but point was, much as we may at times think otherwise, our Vehicle Towing agencies operate on similar kinds of grounds even if haha OF COURSE its on a different level but see, well, rules and rules here also..."

How IS THAT APPROACH instead for a GENUINELY STRONGER ARGUMENT?

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) a year ago

Also, let's say for argument's sake the employee of that Vehicle Towing Agency actually DID try and communicate with that complaining agitated customer on that level...

Would that man in question then end up being CONVINCED and ultimately, even if reluctantly and still unhappily, pay off the fine without launching any verbal or physical attacks at the place and then move on? I'm aware there won't be a movie after this but still...

Or was Ricardo Darin's character so full of himself that no matter how calmly, rationally, intelligently and convincingly the workers there tried to explain the situation to him, he wasn't having any of it unless it simply went his way full stop?

And the fact that no employees there willingly even CONSIDERED taking his sides or actions that may prove he is not at fault, and refused to explain themselves and be polite to him and didn't even bother to appropriately refute any of his arguments about "unpainted lines" and them being "the very opposite of criminals" etc, well... Was it all logical and understandable on their behalfs, do you think?

Thanks. :)

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) 9 months ago

Also, if his character was so convinced that he was the one who was right and that everyone in the VTA were wrong, instead of attacking the place with a fire extinguisher and planting a bomb in that place...

Couldn't he, I don't know, write a letter to some agency complaining that he believes his vehicle was unfairly towed and that the fine slapped was unreasonable?

Instead of going mad etc, handle it like a reasonable human being?

And seriously though, could not ONE employee at that organization refute his arguments and perhaps, if it really IS the law and they are in the right, state that "Having parking spaces unpainted does NOT automatically make them a parking spot and that by law if they see a vehicle parked there inappropriately they are REQUIRED to take it and that this is basically the country's law etc and everyone knows it and that LEGALLY they are not ALLOWED to just ignore the matter let alone allow the customer to take the vehicle away without paying etc".

Even IF he thought he was entitled to the compensation and that they were in the wrong, why simply tell them that and completely wrongly hope that they would compensate him in the place right this second? And has it not occurred to him that "lack of paint in the line in the parking spot" may not be alone a sufficient reason for him to freely park their vehicle with no trouble at all afterwards?

And why couldn't he perhaps arrive at that place with a LAWYER or a friend or someone who clearly KNOWS the matter?

And what was he hoping to achieve by setting a bomb later in that place?

reply

[–] TheMan18 (12480) 9 months ago

And yet, he was simply going on about "Oh, the line was unpainted", "Listen to me, it wasn't PAINTED!", "I'm supposed to just like that know it even if it wasn't painted" etc ad nauseam and people at the agency couldn't refute his arguments and state at least a short sentence on the fact that the lack of paint alone doesn't mean its a parking spot and respectably inform him that they are following laws rather than unfairly cheating for the sake of extorting money out of drivers like that?

Even his friends and family to whom he complained failed to give him appropriate advice or even how to really handle such a matter.

We and people we knew at times also had our vehicle fined or towed sometimes wrongly but sometimes we could win the case were we to handle it appropriately etc.

And that towing agency guy also didn't bother to correspond back with "No I'm not a president" and even give a small line about the aforementioned "paint" issues in parking spaces or was he afraid of him? And when he called him a "f*cking president" could he not ask him yet again not to be rude?

reply