ok so when his father was talking to him about his sins he mentioned he blushed when he saw sigi half naked right? is this because he had committed the crime. or his "puberty problems" were related? homosexuality???? its so confusing.
shareUm, no. The OP is right. The father mentioned that he saw Martin blush when they talked about Sigi's butt getting whipped. I strongly felt the minister was implying the kid was turned on when he heard about Sigi, and thought it was perverse. Which was further "evidence" to him that his son was whacking off, since he was a "pervert."
But I still found that odd too. Whacking off is one thing...normal for boys his age... but getting aroused at another boy's naked butt getting whipped is kinda...wrong.
BUT the OP makes a good point. MAYBE he was blushing when he heard about it...not b/c he was aroused, but because he was guilty b/c he'd been part of the beating. And the dad misinterpreted everything as sexual. Maybe Martin wasn't even jerking off...but he let his dad believe it because it steered him away from the REAL reason why Martin was feeling guilty with dark circles under his eyes, etc. (The real reason being that he was helping his sister torture the kid and other bad things).
Perhaps the priest is sexually abusing his young son?
Have you noticed that directly after this scene, it cuts to the doctor having anal sex? Coincidence perhaps but maybe the director wants you to put the pieces together and not reveal everything to you so easily....
agree^
But then again this movie is all about gossip in the village, and in the end it is all *beep* There is no truth to it, only your opinion.
Exactly.
What I didn't like about the movie was it showed the sexual abuse of the young girl when it was meant to be a story told through the eyes of the school-teacher. I think it would have been better if the director hinted at possible abuse, rather than blatantly showing it. But then again, maybe that wouldn't have made for a good dramatic movie if the whole thing was truly pure speculation told through such a way.
Then again, perhaps the abuse has been made public in the future and the school teacher is therefore reflecting on what is already public knowledge in some scenes. For example, the girl may had confronted her father about the abuse as she grew up and the school teacher therefore decides its not speculation and fact.
And knowing that the priest was physically abusing his kids would not have been hard to figure out, explaining why those scenes of abuse exist.
I initially had issues with that whole switching of the POV, too - how is it the teacher could be narrating this story to us when he was't in this room or that? etc. But then I remembered the very clever opening lines, which gave the director and writer a lot of leeway in their relation of the story to us. The teacher starts out by saying something to the effect of, "I do not know how much of the story I am about to tell you is true. Some of it I know for fact; other parts are just hearsay. But this is what I remember about the people in the village." (Someone might be able to find the exact quote, but the gist is there.) So they covered themselves quite well with that, and you're probably right in assuming that some of it became public knowledge later, which allowed us to see some interpretation of those private scenes of abuse.
As for the original post in this thread & the subsequent comments...interesting observation. I had felt as though there was more to that exchange between Martin and his father, but I hadn't given it much thought yet (I only just saw the movie a few hours ago!). I think there's an equally good chance that Martin was blushing because he was "turned on" by seeing Sigi beaten (possibly because he'd been conditioned by his father's beatings already in some twisted way), or that he was blushing out of guilt because he and Karla had engaged in the beating of Sigi, or...yeah, there are a lot of ways you could read that scene. Iiiiiinteresting.
~ http://prettyh.blogspot.com/ ~
ok so when his father was talking to him about his sins he mentioned he blushed when he saw sigi half naked right?Wrong people. When Martin's father (the pastor) has his talk with his son, the incident with Sigi is never mentioned and is not even remotely alluded to.
The father mentioned that he saw Martin blush when they talked about Sigi's butt getting whipped. I strongly felt the minister was implying the kid was turned on when he heard about Sigi, and thought it was perverse.
I think there's an equally good chance that Martin was blushing because he was "turned on" by seeing Sigi beaten.
You've got it Pearl_Jade, Martin was blushing because his father was making a very embarrassing accusation. But it gave Martin an "out" to explain away his sullen behavior. Better to be guilty of "waxing the carrot" than to be knee-deep in torture, conspiracy, and subterfuge...
shareI think the unnamed boy in the pastor's story was fictional. You don't get feeble from masturbating, you don't get the body of an old man because you can't quit masturbating, and most certainly you won't die from it. The pastor told what he probably considered a white lie. The boy in question was supposedly from another parish, which reminded me of those urban legends ("The phone call was from upstairs") that never happened to the person who is telling them, but to an acquaintance of an acquaintance.
You may cross-examine.
It sounded like an exaggeration of puberty to me. The (mysterious) boy was tired a lot, therefore had bags under his eyes, he was depressed and moody, and had acne. That's pretty standard stuff there. And then, to really scare Martin, the pastor says the boy wanked himself to death.
The pastor's kids probably get "a kid from one village over was bad, just like you, then they died" stories all the time.
I just re-watched the scene and yes, you are right. I misunderstood while watching the first time and thought the Pastor was talking about Sigi, too. Upon re-watch, I'm not sure why I thought that.
Makes more sense why the Pastor acted the way he did to the teacher at the end.
I still believe Martin either participated in the abuse of Sigi and Karli or at least had knowledge of who did it. Just MHO, what I walked away from the movie feeling, was that the children (or at least a handful of them) were the ones doing it.
Blackclouds, there is no doubt in my mind that this is implied. That scene doesn't just appear after the scene with Martin for no reason - the connection is in the editing.
To be honest, at first I thought it was actually a continuation of the Martin scene since we couldn't see who the doctor was having sex with.
[deleted]