MovieChat Forums > Rope (1948) Discussion > Final Jimmy Stewart Speech

Final Jimmy Stewart Speech

posted 11 years ago by Jantonini
23 replies | jump to latest

After being confronted with the fact that his teachings were the inspiration of the whole murder Jimmy Stewart makes a kind of confusing speech but I think it is really important if you want to look at the weird philosophy side of this movie. My question is, upon hearing all that, does Jimmy Stewart finally realize how flawed his teachings are OR does he feel that his teachings were misconstrued by Gay Ben Affleck.

At one point he says "who were you to think your superior" is he just in denial of his own theories?

[–] Boromir (10091) 4 months ago

This is an interesting discussion, though I do not believe it is fully developed here.

What I find particularly intriguing is that the one moment when Rupert's sharp detective instincts — his acute attention to detail and his ability to discern subtle changes in people's expressions and behavior — seem to falter is precisely when he becomes absorbed in his own macabre humor and intellectual gamesmanship. It appears that he allows himself to drift into a realm of cynical intellectualism, failing to grasp that Brandon has crossed a line. Brandon moves beyond a mere discourse of dark humor to a profound seriousness, revealing a deep-seated contempt for human frailty and society's less fortunate.

Rupert seems to embody the archetype of the intellectual who has lost his grasp on the simple practicalities of everyday life and has become fell in love with his own role as an intellectual, perched high in an ivory tower. From this elevated position, he looks down with arrogance and a certain cynicism upon the ordinary people below. He indulges in abstract ideas as if they lack any substantial impact on life itself, speaking of Nietzsche’s concept of the "superman" (it should be noted that Nietzsche's ideas of the "will to power" and the "superman" were unjustly distorted by the Nazis; Nietzsche spoke of self-overcoming and the creation of meaning, not murder. However, the ambiguity of his thought left ample room for misinterpretation). Yet, Rupert fails to recognize the destructive elements hidden within such ideas, elements that are present in many other philosophical approaches as well.

Continue in the next post...

[–] Boromir (10091) 4 months ago

Continue...

Many intellectuals and thinkers have become what Lenin referred to as "useful idiots," unwittingly serving as vessels for dangerous ideas that ultimately benefit malicious forces. Those familiar with the history of certain educated individuals may have observed that many view life with a cynical and detached perspective. Their desire to remain perpetually different and avant-garde carries both positive and negative dimensions: they have the potential to drive societal progress, yet they can just as easily lead it toward ruin.

The point is that Rupert is not a bad person; on the contrary, he is a noble individual who genuinely loves people and humanity. However, his life within the closed and elitist confines of academia has, in some ways, severed his connection to the realities of everyday life. This detachment leads him to feel a profound sense of disgust with himself the moment he grasps the real-world implications of his theories.

When Jimmy confronts Rupert, identifying him as one of their own, Rupert becomes resentful. I can understand why this impression arises, as Rupert does not fully acknowledge his guilt or assume responsibility. There is some truth to this criticism, yet, at the same time, he is clearly tormented by the very ideas and beliefs he has embraced and support for so many years.

[–] jriley555 (8382) 4 months ago

Great point. He totally contradicts himself. And then gets up on his high-horse that someone he had been 'mentoring' was clueless enough to take him seriously.

It makes a powerful point, though. Talk is cheap. So is hateful talk - 1948 was in an era in which Europe and large parts of Asia had been literally leveled by such talk, first resentful hot air, later party platforms, then armies on the march.