MovieChat Forums > Druff > Replies
Druff's Replies
Did someone in the Trivia section at IMDB post that she had a cameo? That would be bullshit. The movie was already shot and edited and the first version of the score was already in the works by the time the Eurythmics were brought on the project by Richard Branson.
Unless Cheney himself undergoes deep psycho analysis and the findings are reported, we can never know what he is in his core. All we can know is what he did and when he did it.
The movies spelled it out enough for me. He would have been a mediocre nobody, if not for the tough love of his wife. His quest to live up to her expectations lead him down a path that showed him power and gave him access to it, and he grabbed it and decided to use it for his own benefit rather than the benefit of his country.
It wasn't hard to suss out. And you basically laid out the answers to your own questions, so I actually don't know what the fuck you're talking about to begin with.
Not your type, eh?
Boo hoo hoo, poor Alex! She should be able to seduce and fuck and fall in love with as many married men as she wants! #SMASHTHEPATRIARCY
Don't know, don't care, just wanted to say that I just re-watched this movie for the first time since I originally saw it, and I loved Alex's line early on when she's trying to tempt Dan to come over to her place, "I love animals, and I'm a great cook." The sort of foreshadowing nobody could spot on a first time viewing.
No argument here.
Oh! I assumed you'd seen it since you were on the board for it. =P
I saw it about 25 years ago, watched it one lazy weekend afternoon with a couple of friends. We were probably drinking beers and talking during it. I don't recall thinking much of it. Was in my early 20s and didn't relate to anything about it I guess.
I just watched it for the second time last weekend. For most of it, I kept thinking, "I thought I saw this back in the 90s, but I've definitely never seen this movie before." Finally towards the end there was a key scene that I did remember. I haven't been able to stop thinking about it since.
True enough in a general sense. All relationships are complicated and can drive people's lives off the rails for a virtually infinite number of reasons. But I was referring specifically to what was presented in Paris, Texas. There's really no reason to doubt Travis and Jane were once truly madly in love. You'd have to drag in irrelevant hypotheticals to conclude otherwise.
No doubt the parlour scene was intense and great and blah blah blah. But I was much more emotionally affected by the Jane/Hunter reunion scene in the hotel room.
[quote]Everyone keeps talking like the age difference is a flaw in the movie. It's practically the whole point. This isn't a love story. It's a story about a disturbed abusive man who took in a poor teenage girl.[/quote]
I take your point, but let's not be in denial that Travis and Jane apparently did in fact fall in love with each other, according to the backstory.
Did they make Paris, Texas 2 where they showed that the kid's life was fucked up because he reunited with his mother?
No. We have no idea what happened. You're a pessimist who assumes the mother would be incapable of giving the kid a good life.
It's not science fiction for a person to be a total fuck-up and then grow into an upstanding and responsible adult because they have a child. It happens in "real life" every day.
Jane clearly stumbled after she had Hunter. She was so young. Travis' issues didn't help. The story is about them finding redemption and hope. I suppose those things naturally won't resonate with a viewer who harbors a pessimistic outlook.
Damn. Some long sticks are shoved up some tight asses around here.
I wonder if the writer/director considers prison guards in general to be "innocent."
He did more than just "swing at her with his little chainsaw thing," he got her in the side of the neck. If it isn't visible enough you can slow it down frame by frame and see the blood spurt out when he connects.
True enough they seemed to make it ambiguous by not showing her soaked neck and clothing from bleeding out, and her friends sitting next to her didn't seem to realize exactly what happened... but it was enough for me.
For the record, I was referring to posters like LetThemEatCake.
"Okay, I know this has been asked before, but I was wondering if someone could answer the question here; how come in the TV series they call the Vogon constructor fleet a fleet of flying saucers when they're clearly not?"
Holy crap. I can't even imagine being that incapable of not taking things literally. Must be aggravating.
Personally I see absolutely no reason to assume or suspect he died. His character development made it clear that he was a callow and self centered sort. To me it was obvious that he was no longer in love with Rachel Weisz's character, couldn't go through with blinding himself, and abandoned her at the restaurant.
Naturally I can't say that is absolutely what actually happened, because it was deliberately left ambiguous. Yet it was obvious to me due to how David had been painted up to that point as a character. If there is anything specific you can point out to indicate anything to contradict my conclusion, by all means, I'll hear it out.
Sad that some people don't know a great director from the hole in their own ass.