MovieChat Forums > chrichrichri > Replies
chrichrichri's Replies
Not everybody needs to be a good person, and its good that not everybody is one.
crying is an act of letting it go.
both couldn't at that time.
Conrad because he felt guilty for Buck's death and in a way also accused both Buck and his mother for not being loved equally by her.
Beth because she did not want to reveal that Buck meant so much to her - more than Conrad, and in a way she accused Conrad for still being alive, while Buck is not. All she sees in for her is keeping up the normal "happy" family [to the outside], which she destroys from the inside by doing so.
Both are similar personalities, but Conrad is still so young and in a state of change and exploration. Beth is a settled adult who does not only feel responsible for her actions, but also for the entire family and all its members. The first thing Conrad asks from Burger is to help him control himself (like her mother does all the time). Beth on the other hand would never even go to Burger, because she controlled herself to an extent that she can't even admit having weak sides any more.
Fuller's imagination of a 17c venetian glass
says Grant when Kelly opens the present
- Tim and Mary do not age although years pass
- only male ones can time travel - greetings from the patriarchy. Are girs to0 stupid, or less worthy?
Ok this might not be a plothole as it is an "explained" rule in the film, but a clear plot hole is: Kitkat suddenly can time travel when holding her brothers hands in a dark closet, sure.
- the time travels lead to very linear changes (Tim changes an incident and not much else changes) BUT Tim's children are totally different when travelling before they were born?
- Tim's father explains: you cannot travel into the future. But they do not just travel into the past (and then relive it in a new way), they also travel 'back' from the past into an unknown future - maybe having other children (Tim), or boyfriends
(Kitkat). How can they return to the same closet/dark spot, when they might not even be in this location at that time in the new reality. Time travelling does not lead to Groundhog-day-lops, so does new-try-Tim just jump into closets for no reasons, so that his 'soul' or conscience can return from the past? How can they know more about their undone reality or feel more with the undone reality than with the new one, that now actually happend, while the first one never happened as it was undone? Tim's new child: total stranger, Tim's unborn child: 'his' child. It's not even understandible how they activate the return travel - it happens just like that? HIs father explains how to leave off to the past, and Tim just does it. He does not even ask: how to return. A movie does not need to explain everything, but: This returning to the future present remains a huge plot hole as it is a too important element not to be explained.
She tries to stay on top whatever happens. No police - they would make her a victim. She even shocks the rapist by telling him she "wants" it.
What seems "nasty" is that she speaks the truth, which hurts. And she definitely does not try to be a politically correct person.
The film is a lot about people doing awful things because of their illusions. And they invent their illusions because of the awul reality. Michèle is trying to break through this endless vicious circle, and I think she manages at the end.
Michéle got from her father a certain certain cruel pleasure, which she found a way to outlive with her sadistic neighbour. His son killed this sadistic pleasure for her, which meant relief for her and a way of realising that she can take initiative in healing social problems of her closest beyond just uncovering what is wrong with their relationships.
She didn't want to involve the police, this would only bring the press to warm up the story of a 10 year old girl as a assistant of a mass killer. She rather wants to be strong and independent and able to protect herself.
I too had the impression that Michèle was the one seeing through and always speaking the truth, maybe the only one in the movie. And that makes her appear incredible cruel and cold. She sees through the character of his son's girlfriend, she sees that it is not his son's baby and she says so in his son's face, whenever he seems most happy with his illusions. She knows that the police can't bring her justice after being raped, she wouldn't hide her experience either, she tells her friends at a fine dinner without even showing emotions. She sees through her mother's young "lover", who only is attracted to her because of the excitement of sleeping with the wife of a mass killer - and so she openly speaks against their alliance. Michelle has experinced the worst of the people closest to her that made her lose all faith in emotional affection, so whenever possible she breaks all the walls and barriers people build to protect their hopes, dreams and illusions, which cause their twisted reality and helps them to exist in it.
There is she (Michèle) and opposite her street, there is another woman (Rebecca). In-between there is a man with sadistic tendencies, both are attracted to. He changes sides - the nice guy and husbands on the one side, the sadistic anonymous rapist on the other. The only thing Michèle has is knowing and speaking the truth. The only thing her christian neighbour has is faith - this is how they manage to carry on, this is how they finally find peace (even with her parents in Michelle's case).
There was one great moment in the movie, I really had to laugh out loud: it was the look Hector got from the gangster boss in „Africa“, when imprisoned Hector tells him, he just wants to find out how to be happy.
It was this genuin „are you serious“ look I saw so often when a white volunteer girl was „shopping“ with a local on an African market - this problem how can she spend her money and her enjoying shopping as full day fun activity. OR when a white European is „stressed“ or struggles hard with planning ahead and making schedules. You get this exact look - „are you serious“/„you must be kidding“/„wow - straaaange person with problems“. Its the look that makes you feel like an alien coming from a different planet.
People like Hector should learn: for most people on this planet its already a challenge just to survive. I did not have the impression he was aware of that at any moment from beginning to the the end. Going first class on a plane - check, tourist visit at a monastery - check, meeting first girlfriend again - check, being imprisoned by an African gangster boss - check.
My impression was Hector - and this movie - lacked to understand what human dignity means. Without it you can never be happy.
"Africa does have violent, corrupt people, as well as happy well adjusted people who like people who are kind to them."
Wait - every continent has these! Simon was acting nice, and actually quite American (which are human to be fair).
He went to "China", "Africa", and "LA" :D :D
See this about "the country of Africa": [url]https://www.instagram.com/barbiesavior/[/url]
... you need to watch the 1947 Walter Mitty and forget about the remake
https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/40092-the-secret-life-of-walter-mitty?language=en-US
:D that would be nice
they are flying with a small red car around the Eiffel tower
... and that he was her parents ideal boyfriend
probably you won't be here any more. Its good German, Peter Lorre was from Austrian-Hungarian Empire.
He says:
TRANSLATION
Disguised Moto: "Can somebody of these scums tell me, how you can ask money for such stuff here - eh? This exhibition is an insult in the name of art! It makes me wanna puke!"
Man: "Uf you don't like it, please go!"
...
Moto "...because I wanted to see the work of young men. I will have a walk, maybe I will see something better!
Man: "But be quiet, otherwhise out! - Here," (gives him leaflet)
...
Moto "This is absolutely the most abominable, I have seen in my whole life! This is - These are the scribblings of a crazy child. Disgusting."
Moto: "Painting - wah - This is not a painting. This is despicable, disgusting. A kitsch (cheap trash)."
...
Moto "I show you something. This ist beautiful - eh!"
ORIGINAL
Disguised Moto: "Kann mir hier einer von diesen Dreckskerlen hier sagen, wie man für so ein Zeug hier Geld verlangen kann - He? This exhibition is an insult in the name of art! Zum Kotzen!"
Man: "Wenns Ihnen nicht gefällt, bitte gehen Sie"
...
Moto "...because I wanted to see the work of young men. Ich werd herumgehen, vielleich seh ich was Besseres!
Man: "Aber seien sie ruhig sonst raus mit Ihnen - Hier!" (gives him leaflet)
...
Moto "Das ist das überhaupt Scheußlichste, was ich in meinem ganzen Leben gesehen hab! Das ist ja, das sind die Kritzeleien (?voice not clear) von einem verrückten Kind. Widerlich."
Moto: "Painting - Wäh - Das is not a painting. Das ist ekelhaft, wiederlich. Ein Kitsch."
...
Moto "I show you something. Das ist beautiful - he?
3 reasons:
money - money - MONEY !!!
$ € ¥
... The only person that sees through this political mess is the chancellor, corrupt of course, but at least he manages to keep some balance in the country. „You know what’s going on behind every door, but you don’t know what's happening on your roof.“ Politics are not about plans and consequences, you won’t know then, politics are a vage oscillating field of forces. Good politics are to play all the destructible political forces against each other, to outplay them, in order to prevent self-destruction. Who lived in 1945 saw all political systems fail (whether empires, democracies, dictatorships or left and right), political ideals lead to total destruction. No country benefitted from the wars. Whoever gets into power, will misuse it. Corruption is always part of the game. What the politics do is never helping the simple peasants (neither the actions of the throne nor Lt Chernoffs 51 edicts). The people have it best when left alone and have fun together.
I am not sure about the vase-like heating device, but I am sure
this smashing vases was a symbol of how politics smash countries purely out of rage
The film came out in 1945. It was produced at the peak of the second world war. It is an incredible funny movie, at the same time, it is a sharp critique against all politics. Politics are like predators. Everybody leads intrigues, spies and everybody denies everything. Nobody means what they say and when said, nobody has to tell it. The foreign marquees are only concerned about the Olgas in life. The revolutionaries are only waiting to loot. She - the Czarina - wants peace of course, on the other hand, there would be nothing to say against a small peninsula at the black see. The Czarina is conceited, bored. She loves her status, where she is justified to command everybody and to play the grand diva. At the same time, she hates her responsibilities being „mother russia“, she only strives for personal passion and love. She plays with lives of everybody the same games over and over again. She is mainly considered about her aging and „domestic affairs“.
And then there comes our knight in shining armor: He is portrayed as the perfect soldier: loyal, selfless, full of duty, respect, honor, integrity, and personal courage. Is he the hero who safes Russia? No, he is the biggest fool, which he even learns to understand at the end. The only value somebody like him has: to look simply divine in that white uniform. One message of the movie is clearly: Heroism and idealism lead to nowhere. His naive and dumb idealism would destroy even the ones closest to him (Anna). Such young guys do not belong to the war, they belong to their Annas, to simple homes in the countryside. ...
the conversation with the cook before the final scene - for me the best of the entire movie