MovieChat Forums > The Proposition (2006) Discussion > A couple of things I didn't get (spoiler...

A couple of things I didn't get (spoilers)

posted 14 years ago by Yinky
17 replies | jump to latest

The scene where Charlie sticks his hands in his pits then smells them. Huh?

After Arthur burns the camp...what, does Charlie go back to sleep? The next scene is where John Hurt's character grabs Charlie. I didn't understand what happened in between those scenes, it seemed like something was missing.

And! The big question. Who murdered the family???? There was a scene where the aboriginal member of the gang says to Charlie "it's all your fault, you never should have run off." Does that mean that Charlie & Mikey killed the family after they had "run off"? Or did they leave after Arthur, Sam, the aboriginee, Charlie AND Mikey killed the family? I kind of got the impression that maybe Arthur had nothing to do with it?

I watched it twice & still couldn't figure it out.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Yinky 14 years ago

Yes,TMI! Lol! They shouldn'ta put that scene in, gah-ross!

I thought it was odd that Charlie would just go back to sleep with Arthur all yelling & burning everything. I did get that John Hurt was a bounty hunter & all that, I just thought it was weird that C. went back to sleep.

Thanks for the bit about the murder, I was unsure. What made you feel that your interpretation is what happened? Like I said, I watched it twice & didn't come up with a solid answer. How do you know that Charlie & Mikey were involved and ran off after the murders? I don't know why, but I really wanted Charlie & Mikey to be innocent. At least, of those murders anyway....

[–] masterofallgoons 14 years ago

In the commentary Nick Cave asks John Hillcoat why Charlie would smell his arm pits and Hillcoat said that it was something the Aboriginals did, and because Charlie spent time with his brothers Aboriginal partner, he would have picked up on some of those things. It has something to do with being animalistic and rugged, I suspect.

As for the murder, in the beginning Charlie says to Captain Stanley "I no longer ride with me brother." Then after Stanley's speech to him he goes back to visit the scene of the rape and murder of the Hopkins family. I thought it was pretty clearly implied that Charlie ran off, taking Mikey with him, because he could no longer agree with what his older brother Arthur was doing. Charlie was clearly an outlaw, but he seemed to have no interest in brutal rape and murder...As seen by his redemption at the very end.

[–] Yinky 14 years ago

I don't know about it being "pretty clear" but I did get an inkling that Charlie & Mikey weren't involved in the murder. I watched it a second time with that in mind, but I still didn't come to any definite conclusion. I want to believe it though.

[–] masterofallgoons 14 years ago

When I said it was 'pretty clearly implied' I meant just that. Not that it was spelled out, but to me the scene where Charlie revisits the Hopkins house shows that he has major remorse about what happened there, and I took it to mean that he was sorry for what he witnessed as opposed to what he directly did. That's why he went back.

Also, Captain Stanley doesn't believe that Charlie had anything to do with it. He says "Arthur Burns is an abomination" and informs Charlie that Mrs. Hopkins was pregnant. He didn't tell Charlie that he was an abomination, or that Mikey was. I also felt like that's why Captain Stanley approached Charlie to begin with. Sure, he had to offer him the proposition, using Mikey as leverage, but he seemed to try and cater to Charlie's compassion in that conversation. If he didn't believe that Charlie was capable of compassion then he wouldn't have spoken to him that way. I'm also quite certain that Mikey couldn't have done such a thing. He was a little baby, and even though he reacted this way because the violence was directed at him, the portrayal of that character made it pretty clear that he would have had a hard time with violence of any kind.

When Charlie says "I no longer ride with me brother", I think that says a lot about his feelings toward Arthur. He may have been trying to avoid Stanley's proposition, but I really think he meant that... Also, we know he ran off. Arthur says so. I can only think of one real reason he would have done that.

It may not be a definite conclusion, but I think the implications are very strong.

[–] Yinky 14 years ago

Well said. I think you're right.

[–] Ace_Moonshot 14 years ago

That was the way I took it. That that was where Charlie and his brother parted ways. And I thought/felt that he did it before murders occurred but he knew it was going to happen and he did nothing to stop it. Because the only way would be to kill Arthur. Did not Arthur say something about why didn't you stop me? But at very worst, Charlie was there and could not/did not stop it and it eat at him to the point he separated and took Mikey to save Mikey's rather innocent soul.

Don't trust reality. After all, it's only a collective hunch.

[–] subase 14 years ago

The smelling of the armpits is related to the barrenness of the land and one only being able to rely on ones own body.

Smelling ones own body odors and cupping ones genitals, is a psychological attempt to become closer to ones body and ones senses. An attempt to escape delusion and fantasy, and bring oneself into the moment.

The aboriginals have a practice for young boys to reach manhood status called 'walkabout' whereby they basically go out into the wilderness alone until they find themselves, their place within the mythology of the aboriginals. There isn't any time limit on this endeavor.

Usually men become closer to the body and others through a relationship with another, usually a woman. Touching someones else's body in affection or sexually again is a reinforcement and realization of ones own bodies existence, united in action and thought.

In walkabout or in the case of Guy Pearce alone in the wilderness without his brother (which he considered as a sort of son and was very protective of). Guy Pearce smells his armpits, trying to come to the truth he is looking for within himself. (Not just in his mind but in his body, as they are both united)

He only succeeds in this at the end of the film.

Stanley too, has a similar relationship with the body of his wife who does not reciprocate his beliefs and ideals, hence his inability to sexually become one with her. That he offers a hand out in kinship to another a man, a criminal of all people. Reinforces the isolation the barrenness of the land Stanley and Guy Pearce live in.

[–] masterofallgoons 14 years ago

It's interesting, subase, that this little moment has such a meaningful background as they came up with it on the set. Nick Cave was actually unhappy with this moment until John Hillcoat explained it to him on the commentary.

[–] Profondorosso75 14 years ago

i've never smelled my pits. what's a scrotum?

"everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die"

[–] cmgilliford 14 years ago

"There was a scene where the aboriginal member of the gang says to Charlie "it's all your fault, you never should have run off."

This statement was not about the murders but about the death of Mikey. He was saying that Mikey would still have been alive if he hadn't run off.

[–] xenophonnelson 13 years ago

Charlie and Mikey weren't involved in the Hopkins massacre. They had left by then. It was Arthur and his friend Samuel and the black guy that killed the family. I don't think Stanley was going to hang Charlie or Mikey if Charlie killed Arthur in time.

[–] TheSchmoo 13 years ago

I wouldn't say that Charlie and Mikey weren't involved in the rape and murder. I think it's likely they parted from the group after the fact. Sure, Mikey is a simpleton and perhaps can't be held accountable, but the guards at his prison seem to think he engaged in the crime. As for Charlie - well, he's an outlaw and a criminal. Just because he's our protagonist doesn't mean he's not capable of rape or cold-blooded murder. I see his story in the film as something of a redemption, which actually makes it more fulfilling.

[–] the-whole-year-inn 13 years ago

1) the armpit thing was just Charlie calculating how long he'd been away from civilization.

2) Charlie had just been speared through the Torso so falling asleep was pretty reasonable considering he'd suffered what in any other universe would be a fatal injury.

3) The Murder's occurred after the Burns gang split up and possibly because the Burns gang split up.
When Arthur and Charlie are up on the cliff trying to con each other you can see straight away that Arthur although ruthless and clearly insane isn't nearly as cunning as his gang of miscreants believe him to be. The only person able to play on Arthur's weakness and belief in family loyalty is Charlie.

from the conversation on the Clifftop Arthur is obviously the leader but Charlie is the guy who gets the last word on what they got up to. Their relationship in the gang was clearly based on Charlie's ability to manage Arthur's decisions, Charlie would always be the one to steer him away from doing something overly vicious or bloodthirsty. So over time as Charlie saw that Arthur was becoming unjustifiably sadistic and was ignoring his council, he decided to ride away with Mikey before Arthur did something really disastrous like the massacre.

So When the aboriginal Two-Bob say's "its all your fault Charlie" there's a deeper accusation; on the surface he means Mikey's death, but he's also saying "if you had been around you could have talked Arthur out of that nasty f---ing business at the hopkins farm."

[–] DingusStudley 13 years ago

Wow what a massive limb you're going out on.

I think he ONLY meant it's charlie's fault mikey is dead. If he hadn't run, the two wouldn't have been caught, mikey wouldn't have been flogged, wouldn't be dead. See no deeper meaning behind this whatsoever.

[–] Fedorevsky 11 years ago

The scene where Charlie sticks his hands in his pits then smells them. Huh?

After Arthur burns the camp...what, does Charlie go back to sleep? The next scene is where John Hurt's character grabs Charlie. I didn't understand what happened in between those scenes, it seemed like something was missing.

And! The big question. Who murdered the family???? There was a scene where the aboriginal member of the gang says to Charlie "it's all your fault, you never should have run off." Does that mean that Charlie & Mikey killed the family after they had "run off"? Or did they leave after Arthur, Sam, the aboriginee, Charlie AND Mikey killed the family? I kind of got the impression that maybe Arthur had nothing to do with it?

I watched it twice & still couldn't figure it out.

Watch it again in 10 years time when you have grown up. If you're already grown up I don't know what to say. Go see a doctor or something. Maybe there's something they can do, though I doubt it.

Hidyho!

[–] Yinky 11 years ago

Hey troll, what's your problem? You don't need to wait ten years, you can go *beep* yourself right now.