|
PopRocks posted:That powerful dystopian music in everyone's favorite scene is electronic musician Laurie Speigel's "Sediment" from 1972. Slate had a pretty neat article about it: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2012/03/30/laurie_spiegel_s_sediment_in_the_hunger_games_how_the_new_movie_righted_a_musical_wrong.html Wow, thanks for linking this. Really great article. What an excellent selection and mark of taste, especially in the film's actual use of the track. I think I'm going to have to seek out what else I can find from Speigel.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 05:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
It does seem that movie lead roles are being more often filled by characters that are devoid of anything resembling actual characterization so that audiences can project onto them rather than creating personalities that we aspire to, loathe, sympathize with, etc. It's no longer about creating a true reaction to a realistic portrayal :[
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 20:46
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:Once they started it, they should have played it up more. I hate to draw the comparison to the Running Man, but since the movie chose to add in the announcers they should have gone more in that direction with the announcer involvement in the show. Katniss is out for like three days during the tracker jacker scene, would have been nice for the announcers to mention that, or during the kills showing an audience reaction cut between Katniss demeanor would have helped show how different(cold) she was from the population. Yeah I think it would have really worked, and enhanced the parody of reality TV, to have the entire games shown from the district viewer's perspective. As if we (the movie audience) were watching a sporting event with a play-by-play guy and color commentator talking over the action the entire time. Not just occasional cuts to John Madden and Al Michaels in the booth. That would have allowed for more exposition on the fly without needing to hear what was going on in Katnis's head. Waverider fucked around with this message at 04:50 on Apr 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 04:48
|
|
|
So why did they play up the Sponsors the entire training scene, then it didn't loving help at all and Woody only sent her two items? Why doesn't every district train people and have them volunteer? Why does the Capitol even set up the Hunger Games if the Capitol can build trees, create fire and create dog/hybrid things out of absolutely nothing? What was the reason for the first revolution? And when does it take place, because Capitol looks extremely modern and have all the technology but the other districts are the Great Depression and had all their poo poo taken away from them? My Gf's little brother said in the end Katniss was supposed to draw her Bow on Peeta but realized what he's doing so he stops, so why not do that to build up on her about how cold and survivalist she actually is versus the berry thing and now she loves the guy I guess? And how terrible are your shows ratings where the team hosting the event has to kill and destroy the entire environment just so they could kill each other faster when they wanted? Drag that poo poo out so people watch it man, do some subtle poo poo not FUCKIN FOREST FIRE and DEMON DOGS to kill the only other athletic threatening guy. And what happens to the winners after? They go to their shithole poverty for good and that's that? Do their families get any immunity to the Reaping? And I hate to break it to fans of the books, but no, most people aren't going to read a book as a prerequisite to a movie. The movie should have done enough to explain this by itself without "God, read the book :eyeroll:" I can understand trivial stuff but there was just NO loving gravity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 04:45
|
|
|
Waverider posted:Yeah I think it would have really worked, and enhanced the parody of reality TV, to have the entire games shown from the district viewer's perspective. As if we (the movie audience) were watching a sporting event with a play-by-play guy and color commentator talking over the action the entire time. Not just occasional cuts to John Madden and Al Michaels in the booth. That would have allowed for more exposition on the fly without needing to hear what was going on in Katnis's head. It's been a long time since I saw it, but you might enjoy Series 7. It's a similar concept, but it really played up the reality tv side of things. Much less dramatic though. More of a comedy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 05:08
|
|
|
Francis Lawrence (I Am Legend,Constantine) has reportedly been offered to direct the sequel. http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=58263
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 11:23
|
|
|
rrradical posted:It's been a long time since I saw it, but you might enjoy Series 7. It's a similar concept, but it really played up the reality tv side of things. Much less dramatic though. More of a comedy. Series 7: The Contenders is an awesome film. It was made before Survivor came over here, but it's oddly prescient. It's probably because the director used a lot of those reality TV techniques, like manufacturing conflict between contestants, setting up "scenes" for drama, and making a "heel" character, from prior shows like the Real World that Survivor and the other "reality competiton" shows followed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 11:25
|
|
|
lomzus posted:Francis Lawrence (I Am Legend,Constantine) has reportedly been offered to direct the sequel. color me unimpressed, at least compared to some of the other names that were being thrown around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
squarerandom posted:So why did they play up the Sponsors the entire training scene, then it didn't loving help at all and Woody only sent her two items? quote:Why doesn't every district train people and have them volunteer? quote:Why does the Capitol even set up the Hunger Games if the Capitol can build trees, create fire and create dog/hybrid things out of absolutely nothing? quote:What was the reason for the first revolution? And when does it take place, because Capitol looks extremely modern and have all the technology but the other districts are the Great Depression and had all their poo poo taken away from them? quote:My Gf's little brother said in the end Katniss was supposed to draw her Bow on Peeta but realized what he's doing so he stops, so why not do that to build up on her about how cold and survivalist she actually is versus the berry thing and now she loves the guy I guess? I think they should have shown the bow part as well but it would have required additional scenes during the training and the games to make it work. My guess is it will be in the extended DVD. In the book they do both the bow and the berries. quote:And how terrible are your shows ratings where the team hosting the event has to kill and destroy the entire environment just so they could kill each other faster when they wanted? Drag that poo poo out so people watch it man, do some subtle poo poo not FUCKIN FOREST FIRE and DEMON DOGS to kill the only other athletic threatening guy. quote:And what happens to the winners after? They go to their shithole poverty for good and that's that? Do their families get any immunity to the Reaping? quote:And I hate to break it to fans of the books, but no, most people aren't going to read a book as a prerequisite to a movie. The movie should have done enough to explain this by itself without "God, read the book :eyeroll:" I can understand trivial stuff but there was just NO loving gravity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2012 05:13
|
|
|
lomzus posted:Francis Lawrence (I Am Legend,Constantine) has reportedly been offered to direct the sequel. This has been confirmed, Francis Lawrence is directing Catching Fire [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...ter+-+Movies%29]. I enjoyed I Am Legend and Constantine, but still feel like he's a definite downgrade from Ross. And no Cronenberg at the helm makes me sad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 10:36
|
|
|
Finally saw this and thought it was pretty entertaining. It's definitely the kind of movie that the more I think about it, the less it makes sense and the more obvious the problems and plot holes become. So I guess Peeta got stabbed at some point? We never see it, we're just told about it. This is the kind of thing that works fine as the movie is moving quickly and you don't really have time to think about it, but it just doesn't make any sense if you pause and examine it. Presumably, if he got stabbed, the other person would have been right the gently caress in front of him. With a leg wound, it would have been kind of absurd to think he could have so easily escaped. Who stabbed him? How did he get away? How did he hide while he put on his makeup? How long ago did this happen that the blood was still wet on the ground? It just doesn't work and it's one of many examples of this kind of strange event going unexplained in the film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 01:50
|
|
|
Peeta is a silly name for a baker character. Are his siblings called Baygel and Chiobatta? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 02:14
|
|
|
Also, it drives me nuts whenever I see someone snack someone's neck with their hands. Would it really have been so much more work to have Kaeto just choke people to death? All you have to do is show him put the choke on from behind (with similar hand positions to the neck snap even!), cut to a reaction shot to disorient the audience to the amount of time elapsed, then cut back to Kaeto dropping a limp body. Then at the end of the movie, when he has Peeta in a hold, it would have had way more tension. Peeta could be shown slowly struggling against Kaeto's deathgrip. Kat has to make a decision quickly. Peeta is dying right in front of her. Where does she shoot? Instead, you have this vague threat of, "Yeah, I'll get around to snapping his neck eventually, just you wait!" and it never really felt like Peeta was in trouble. Finally, if Kat's whole schtick is surviving, why was she suddenly so ready to kill herself? She didn't really have much of a political agenda and even seemed pretty dismissive of The-Other-Guy at the beginning of the movie when he talked about fighting against the machine. And I thought we weren't supposed to think that Kat actually liked Peeta? So it felt sort of jarring that suddenly she was willing to dive into a suicide pact to make some kind of point that she had never really been trying to make before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 02:32
|
|
|
Popcorn posted:Peeta is a silly name for a baker character. Are his siblings called Baygel and Chiobatta?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 02:33
|
|
|
Popcorn posted:Peeta is a silly name for a baker character. Are his siblings called Baygel and Chiobatta? Fo Cochha.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
Haraksha posted:Finally, if Kat's whole schtick is surviving, why was she suddenly so ready to kill herself? She didn't really have much of a political agenda and even seemed pretty dismissive of The-Other-Guy at the beginning of the movie when he talked about fighting against the machine. And I thought we weren't supposed to think that Kat actually liked Peeta? So it felt sort of jarring that suddenly she was willing to dive into a suicide pact to make some kind of point that she had never really been trying to make before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 02:41
|
|
|
I guess I had the opposite reaction to all those racist tweeters, because not only did I have it in my head that Rue was black, I also, for reasons I can't recall (and I'll be damned if I'm reading the book again), thought Peeta was Indian/South Asian. Did the movie whitewash him or did I just assume that because of the spelling of his
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 03:02
|
|
|
Happydogska posted:She was daring the Gamesmaster to kill off the two young lovers who'd just triumphed over adversity in the Hunger Games on national television to the adoration of all who watched. The Gamesmaster blinked. But why? She didn't seem to care that much before. Her whole angle was surviving for her sister. What did she get out of making the Gamemaster blink? I mean, obviously she wanted to live, but she was going to live either way. It felt weird that it was her idea and it felt like they robbed Peeta of the conclusion of his arc. He never thought he would win. He said that he just wanted his death to prove they didn't own him. He never got his heroic sacrifice and it wasn't even his idea to defy the government at the very end. So that line feels wasted. It didn't develop into anything. The story is that much worse for having Kat be the one behind the suicide pact. Also, the dog killing the boy from District 11 felt really cheap. They needed a way to off him, but I guess they couldn't find a way to logically have Kaeto do it. So, they just killed him off screen with the magical-made-from-nothing dogs. OK, sure, whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 03:10
|
|
|
Haraksha posted:Also, the dog killing the boy from District 11 felt really cheap. They needed a way to off him, but I guess they couldn't find a way to logically have Kaeto do it. So, they just killed him off screen with the magical-made-from-nothing dogs. OK, sure, whatever. I thought in the movie we didn't know how Thresh died. If I recall, in the book Thresh and Kato had some probably bad-rear end fight we didn't get see; Kato won but was pretty damaged from it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 03:42
|
|
|
I thought it was pretty explicit that the dog got him. The Gamemaster adds the dogs, we hear some strange noises, a scream, a canon, see his picture, and then the dog jumps out at Peeta.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
Haraksha posted:Also, the dog killing the boy from District 11 felt really cheap. They needed a way to off him, but I guess they couldn't find a way to logically have Kaeto do it. So, they just killed him off screen with the magical-made-from-nothing dogs. OK, sure, whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 07:41
|
|
|
Well, I'm sure that's great for the book, but I'm commenting on a dumb plot device in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 08:58
|
|
|
Haraksha posted:But why? Because she didn't want to kill Peeta and she knew they wouldn't them both die.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
If you think the book is some sort of reprieve for the movie you are mistaken. I've said it before that the movie was a brilliant adaptation of a flawed source and changed enough to make it cinimatically appropriate while maintaining the few charms and touching aspects from the novel. I fear that future directors won't get that and will attempt a direct translation from the following novels. For instance a movie of Catching Fire needs to limit the victory tour and aftermath to one scene of exposition and the "special announcement" should be at the reaping itself. Hell the whole 75th games doesn't begin until the last third of the book.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 18:47
|
|
|
Haraksha posted:So I guess Peeta got stabbed at some point? We never see it, we're just told about it. This is the kind of thing that works fine as the movie is moving quickly and you don't really have time to think about it, but it just doesn't make any sense if you pause and examine it. Presumably, if he got stabbed, the other person would have been right the gently caress in front of him. With a leg wound, it would have been kind of absurd to think he could have so easily escaped. Who stabbed him? How did he get away? How did he hide while he put on his makeup? How long ago did this happen that the blood was still wet on the ground? It just doesn't work and it's one of many examples of this kind of strange event going unexplained in the film. Yeah, that scene was completely out-of-place and massively unrealistic for a number of reasons. 1. Somehow decorating cakes makes him a master of disguise. 2. He was able to disguise himself to look exactly like a series of irregular rocks and moss, without any materials, while injured and presumably being hunted. 3. What was he planning to do after he hid himself, other than bleed to death? Did this make more sense in the book?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 02:20
|
|
|
Vulpes posted:Yeah, that scene was completely out-of-place and massively unrealistic for a number of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
Peeta was in good with the Tributes so they probably let him grab some supplies. I just assumed there were a couple of camo kits among all of the weapons and food and that he stashed those away in case of an emergency
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 03:31
|
|
|
Wiggly posted:Because she didn't want to kill Peeta and she knew they wouldn't them both die. I still don't think this is true. She sure seemed ready to eat the berries. I think she was fully ready to die. But we don't really know anything at all about what's going on through her head and what she really wants, so I guess it could go either way. But the fact that you can't really know for sure just further emphasizes why the scene doesn't work because I don't think the intent was to be ambiguous. It's not like she came to a sudden realization that she didn't want to kill him. And it's not like she had absolute knowledge of Caesar or the political climate around the games. All she knew was that her plot was making for good television. She had no way to know that the Gamemaster wouldn't be willing to let them both die. In a more meta commentary, it seems highly improbable that at no point in the history of the Games did all of the competitors die. Given the nature of the competition, everyone invariably mortally wounding each other seems highly likely. Plus, I don't see that she didn't want to kill Peeta. She'd basically told him she'd be willing to kill him before the Games started. Letting him live also goes against her primary motivation, surviving for her sister. The reading I got was that she was totally faking the whole caring about Peeta thing for the cameras because it kept her alive for longer. I had no reason to think that if that stopped being the case, she wouldn't sell him out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 05:08
|
|
|
It's as if her motivation changed at some point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 05:14
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:It's as if her motivation changed at some point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:It's as if her motivation changed at some point. This is the obvious conclusion we're supposed to arrive at, but we don't really have any justification for it. I can watch the film and arrive at that conclusion, but I'm mostly drawing on, "This is a typical character arc and that's what the author must have been going for." My criticism is that what we see happen doesn't really make a lot of sense based on what we know about the characters, which admittedly is very little. It's like when she went back and kissed him again. She only did it because Haymitch told her to. She was trying to sell that she cared about this guy without ever really believing it herself. And then at the end she tells him she just wants to forget the whole thing. Or was she? Maybe she really did fall for this guy and needed that push to open herself up because being vulnerable could get her killed. We don't know and we have no way of knowing! Prior to the announcement, she couldn't really trust him, or she didn't really act like she did. He had helped her and kept himself distant and been suspicious in equal parts. With the announcement, he could be a tool to even the odds, so her keeping him alive results in her staying alive longer. Or maybe that was just her justification to go back for him. She certainly knew where he was prior to going looking for him. So that's my problem with it. It's ambiguous but not intentionally so. To go back to what I said earlier, the suicide pact doesn't bother me. I can believe that after the rules got changed twice she'd be willing to kill herself to spite the government, but it still seems more likely that it would have been Peeta's suggestion and her first instinct would have been to kill him even if she didn't want to. Instead, Peeta's confession that he wants his death to have meaning foreshadows absolutely nothing. His character arc is robbed of a conclusion. Overall, I think the movie would have been stronger if they had killed themselves. There's the obvious literary tradition of the "star-crossed lovers" both dying because the world is cruel and unfair. But more importantly, the government backing down and letting them live robs the characters of their agency. A moment before, life and death was literally in their hands. Then a second later, nope, the government is telling them what to do. I can just imagine the author saying to them, "Sorry, we need you alive for the sequel."
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 07:45
|
|
|
Haraksha posted:Also, it drives me nuts whenever I see someone snack someone's neck with their hands. Would it really have been so much more work to have Kaeto just choke people to death? All you have to do is show him put the choke on from behind (with similar hand positions to the neck snap even!), cut to a reaction shot to disorient the audience to the amount of time elapsed, then cut back to Kaeto dropping a limp body.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 15:57
|
|
|
Haraksha posted:So that's my problem with it. It's ambiguous but not intentionally so. I'm confused where your justification for this statement is, actually. I actually bought it as a complicated setup for tension between her (maybe?) budding feelings for Peeta and her original feelings for love back home. To say it was unintentional is weird to me. It's in the story, and it's how it was presented. You arrived at the same conclusion I did, so why does it have to be unintentional? Full disclosure, I haven't read any of the books. If it was made to be much clearer in the books where she stood on her feelings, then yeah I can see where the director/screenwriter fumbled on this a bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 19:24
|
|
|
Siets posted:I'm confused where your justification for this statement is, actually. I actually bought it as a complicated setup for tension between her (maybe?) budding feelings for Peeta and her original feelings for love back home. In the books you do know her thoughts, but they indicate that she isn't fully sure as to what her feelings are because she spent most of her time knowing pre rule change that she would have to kill him. Katniss mostly just worries about survival.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
I saw this film with no knowledge of the book at all, and I thought it was just okay. I felt invested in the first third of the movie, but after that it pretty much fell apart for me. There were a few great scenes. It mostly felt like there was a lot of wasted potential. There were a lot of cool concepts established early on that never really delivered. For instance, the notion of sponsorship and gaining public support is emphasized pretty much right off the bat. It's clear that popular tributes will receive more support and have a huge advantage. This is emphasized by the discrepancy between Katniss and Peeta and the fact that Peeta sees her as a much bigger threat after she is ranked. So why does Haymitch have to beg and plead in order for Katniss, the highest-ranking tribute, to receive help? Is it trying to show that sponsorships never really mattered in the first place because the government controls everything? If that's the case, I wish Katniss had realized it and that it was explored further. It never really seemed clear. Another thing was the fact that there's an obvious wealth and quality of life discrepancy between the districts, but that never really comes into play when the tributes interact. I was eager to see how these individuals, who have apparently lived in a single fenced-in area for their whole lives, would react to meeting foreigners for the first time. They could have fleshed out the secondary characters more this way (and the main characters, for that matter, who were pretty one-dimensional.) But it's all just petty, middle-school teasing. Of course, they're teenagers, but they're still people that are living in a poverty-stricken, facist dystopia. I can understand the little kids not understanding the gravity of the situation and acting like that, but many of these people were basically adults. I dunno, all of their interactions just seemed pointless, and served no purpose but to establish a shallow bully-underdog relationship. It really took the impact out of the violence between them. I wish the film went deeper into a lot of little things like that, but it was already two hours long so I don't know how they'd do it. They have to prioritize things. But personally, I would've been fine with them spending less time on the games themselves in favor of some more depth to the characters and fleshing out the world a bit more. Huge Liability fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Apr 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 07:21
|
|
|
Toriori posted:Because Peeta mentions he wants to show the game makers he's "more than just a piece in their Games", and so when it was down to both of them Katniss realizes his ridiculous the Hunger Games are and doesn't want to give the Gamemakers the satisfaction of killing them. Siets posted:This feels so weak to me. If the whole deal was for Peeta to give Kat the idea to kill herself, then his plot was concluded before the Games even began. After that line, he's just there to fulfill plot points. He no longer matters as him. And aside from that line, he honestly doesn't bring anything else to the plot. And that's really the whole issue. I feel like the whole story is predicated on standard plot points that the author was following. That's why the story doesn't work for me. It's like she knew the conclusion and the premise and the only way to get from one end to the other was to go down a checklist of "things that happen in stories", but that doesn't always make sense for the events that are happening and the characters that are in it. Going back to Peeta with Kaeto, it feels so cliche. Obviously he's not working with him. Obviously he's going to betray them. But he doesn't really. The moment is set up. And the payoff is him... telling them to wait a bit? It just comes across like the writers didn't know what they wanted to do with it. It feels like design by committee. "Oh, Peeta should look like he's turned on Kat, but he won't really, but we can't have him save the day at the last minute, that would be too obvious and Kat should be the real hero, so let's have him do nothing at all." Or with other guy from District 11. You hadn't heard a word out of him for most of the film, so he was obviously going to show up at a critical moment, like when Kat thought she was about to be killed at the Cornucopia, but then they forget he's still alive and have to bump him off at the end of the movie. So the whole point I'm trying to get across is that any conclusion I arrive at in the story comes out of the fact that I'm familiar with how a story works and I'm filling in the gaps for the movie. Now, that's not always a bad thing. But this isn't the kind of movie that's supposed to leave you asking questions. It isn't exactly David Lynch. What I mean by unintentional ambiguity is that the writer knows what's supposed to happen, but how we get there isn't always the road that makes the most sense. It's just what happens. So the writer clearly knows what's going on and how the characters actually feel, but they never bother to cover that in the story itself. I get what you guys are saying, I just wasn't sold on it. Fake Edit: Having reread that, it feels like the author tried really hard to avoid being cliche (ie: star-crossed lovers killing themselves, Peeta really being on Kat's side and betraying Kaeto), walked into cliches because they made narrative sense, didn't really know how to subvert the cliches, so she just abandoned the threads altogether.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 12:57
|
|
|
Huge Liability posted:I saw this film with no knowledge of the book at all, and I thought it was just okay. I felt invested in the first third of the movie, but after that it pretty much fell apart for me. There were a few great scenes. It mostly felt like there was a lot of wasted potential. The lack of interaction made sense to me as she knows before she meets them that their end goal is to kill her in the most entertaining way they can, and they will probably succeed. I can't imagine curiosity overcoming that knowledge and getting them to play nicey-nice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 13:07
|
|
|
The point isn't to play nicey-nicey, it's to have "racial" tension demonstrated between the pier groups.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
For those of you familiar with other insanely popular YA fiction, Charlie Kaufman has been named to adapt the Chaos Walking films. http://collider.com/charlie-kaufman-chaos-walking-movie/161397/ Apparently this series isn't as popular in the United States, but its really fantastic. I'm no connoisseur of YA fiction, but I enjoyed much more than HG. It deals with a lot of the same themes as HG (colonialism, war, terrorism, gender, slavery), but with way more nuance and intelligence imo. Also, for a YA novel, it has one of the best, most complex antagonists ever. I had heard they were making a film of it, but didn't give it much thought. I can't wait to see what kind of script Kaufman turns this into. Danger fucked around with this message at 15:13 on Apr 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
I forget if the film brought this up at all, but one thing that motivates Katniss aside from survival is debt. She hates to feel like she owes anyone, and because Peeta is forever associated in her mind with her family's recovery from starvation, she felt as though she could never stop owing him. That drove her completely crazy throughout the series. When she partners up with him in the arena, it's because she knows that the stigma of returning to District 12 after the rule change that permits two victors without him will make her life unlivable. I say this because if they establish in the movie (again, I saw it over a month ago and don't remember details) that she has this preoccupation with repaying debts, you can watch the rest of it in that light, considering her altruistic actions to be essentially self-serving and barely romantic - only as much so as she needs to work the audience.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2012 16:09
|
|
