I know the farmers may have had some trouble due to crops, but how many of those "IOU"s took advantage of him by never paying him but always coming to his store to get stuff?
And yes, I have worked with the public for 15 years so I've seen it.
To those who haven't seen the episode yet: *SPOILER ALERT*
Can't say that I "liked" him, but I'm not convinced that he deserved that horrific entry into hell. Yes, he was an eccentric old miser who delighted in belittling those who owed him money. ...And yes, the IOU game he concocted was cruel -but seriously- it was not _that_ bad! He was not truly evil in my opinion.
Hackles never had to actually loan his goods/money to them in the first place, now did he? It is not that far of a stretch to believe that the debtors were all ungrateful saps. Most of them probably had no intentions to ever pay him back a cent. I honestly did not have much sympathy for them either.
The first couple of times I watched this episode I agreed that he wasn't that bad. But the more I watch it the more I agree with his comeuppance. I actually have more sympathy for the old guy in the Halloween Candy episode, which mirrors this episode. The old guy wasn't obligated to give kids candy, but that's another story for another post.
Hackles was a stingy and greedy man. Now, there's nothing unreasonable about wanting people to repay their debts; and there's nothing unreasonable about being stingy to an extent. What was unreasonable, however, was how much pleasure he got out of holding power over the heads of the people in his debt.
I remember the scene where the farmer told him that he wasn't going to allow his son to go to Hackle's house for Halloween, and Hackles threatens to raise the debt on the man's farm. He took pleasure in stepping on people's necks. He also took pleasure in scaring the children half to death. He cared about money but had no compassion or regard for people or their individual circumstances.
He got what he deserved.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Small minds discuss people; average minds discuss events; great minds discuss movies.
This point exactly.
I think others missed the point in what Hackles crimes were. He abused children, delighted in making them suffer and cry in terror for their parents misfortunes, and held the town hostage as a way to be beholden to his sick games.
He instructs a child on how to succeed at the haunted house saying he should forget about kindness and instead remember money is the most important thing, more important than anything else.
He threatens one farmer with raising his debt if he doesn't bring his son to his haunted house. He is delighted when another says he has been beating his son to toughen him up in preparation for the night.
He says Halloween isn't for adults. He actually refuses to challenge the adults and demands that children (very young children at that) enter a house of horror that he has intentionally set up to terrify them. When one child does come close to retrieving the money 'fairly' Hackles misleads him and then sends him screaming from the home.
He eagerly rushes from the house after the boy expecting to see his Father beating him in a rage bit instead finds him tenderly holding his son. He looks on in disgust and declares, "People of this town have everything backwards" (implying he's sickened by their care and focus on their children when they should be obsessing about money and being cruel, maybe like his own childhood?)
There's a difference between being miserly and being a sadist with a taste for abusing children.
i appreciated his love of Halloween and his ingenuity.
share