MovieChat Forums > National Treasure (2017) Discussion > Paul's stick, and third "young" man at m...

Paul's stick, and third "young" man at meal

posted 8 years ago by Marlburian
8 replies | jump to latest

A bit of Googling suggests that Robbie Coltrane now needs to use a stick in real life, but has there been any indication in the series as to why Paul does? Infirmity, weight, accident? It does add a touch of vulnerability to his character.

And who was the third man at the meal where one of them touched up the waitress? One was young Paul, another young Karl.

BTW, I was a bit surprised at the girl's reaction, which seemed to combine amusement with almost delight - presumably that a TV personality had given her some attention.

[–] lucyfranceshurst 8 years ago

I think that was the point they were making. Marie is recalling how that incident was par for the course, and is thinking how different it could have been if the waitress hadn't have been flattered. This show is so clever. It makes you think and second guess everything, every charrecter does.

[–] ukbloke0404-725-728711 8 years ago

I think the third man was either a producer of the show they were making or some type of tv executive

[–] Gwasgray 8 years ago

Paul uses a stick because Robbie Coltrane has to use a stick. The reason being because he's got bad knees, no doubt caused by his weight. However it does have the bonus of making him resemble Rolf Harris in that photo of him hobbling into court assisted by his wife and daughter.

[–] Prismark10 8 years ago

I thought he was a tv executive, they made him paid the bill.

It's that man again!!

[–] nick-cooper-1 8 years ago

The third man at the meal was Leo (Ian Puleston-Davies), Paul & Karl's agent. I'm surprised nobody seems to have twigged that the waitress was the younger version (Sara Middleton) of Rebecca, whose older version (Kate Hardie) confronted Marie in the court toilets at the beginning. Given that it was clearly Leo who touched her up, it's obvious that she's misremembered it as being Paul (bizarrely, the review in the 'Mirror' still claims it was him!).

On top of the holes in the babysitter's story, it seems that none of the accusations that are actually going to trial are true. I don't think it would be too cynical to predict the ending will be either:

a) Paul is found guilty, even though he's not.

b) Paul will be found not guilty, but we'll then get a flashback of him assaulting someone we've not seen previously.

I really can't see an ending where he is both found not guilty and shown to be innocent, or found guilty and shown to be.

[–] kieronshaw-1 8 years ago

BTW, I was a bit surprised at the girl's reaction, which seemed to combine amusement with almost delight - presumably that a TV personality had given her some attention.

I think the point is also that, in 1970/1980 whenever, that sort of thing would have been seen as "a bit cheeky" and most women would have just laughed it off and gone about their day. (Not that that is the 'correct' reaction. But it was simply the culture: It was normalised. Men slapped women's arses and honked their breasts, and part of being a women was accepting that that was going to happen and just laughing it off as "Carry on" cheekiness...)

...We've thankfully come a long way.

[–] Marlburian 8 years ago

We've only come some way. A young lady lawyer friend of mine was "jumped on" by a male colleague in the lift at work recently; she "laughed it off". But certainly complaints to the police are taken more seriously (perhaps too much so in several recent instances), as would be complaints to "H[uman R[esources)" at work.

At the same time, sexual liberation has increased, due in part to the Web - whether it's facilitating meeting up with like-minded people or, worryingly, giving young people an unfortunate perception of (im)morality.

[–] haroldj-08183 7 years ago

We hear so much about men taking liberties with girls in those days but rarely of the "sport" enjoyed by women at the expense of young lads. It was not uncommon for the female staff in situations such as factories to have a bit of fun with young boys. At one place I worked, a bunch of mature women trapped a young lad in a storeroom and stripped him naked. Apparently he was well endowed and they all wanted a look - a very close look.
When this came to the attention of the management, they fired the boy and took no action against the women.