Bored of being wealthy enough to live happily? What is better a wealthy thief or a poor thief? And by poor I mean living in the street poor till he pulls a successful heist then lives with his stolen money.
shareIf these pretentious rich bozos are so tired of just being wealthy, why can't they extend their dirty little hands to their fellow man to help em out once in awhile. crown just was a spoiled rich overgrown teenager who thought he was so painfully cool.
shareI agree with you, he could just do a lot of donation and live a humble life if he wants.
shareIt happens in real life notwithstanding that they do charity work to reconcile their good fortune. Some might call it a character or personality defect, or it may be an anger management problem. But believe me, it occasionally happens. And you can be sure they do not do it just for the thrills.
shareI can imagine that, thank you.
shareLol, no cookies for you, Rick.
Thomas Crown is maybe the most morally and existentially complex character in all of 60s Hollywood, and he actually does charity in the movie, but that's not the point, which you seemingly missed. The point is, like fellow drifters, like Nicholson in Five Easy Pieces, he hates this modern corporational America and the way your future is set in stone, but unlike Nicholson who rebels, he does capitalize on his talent (great business mind) and hates himself for it.
So he looks outside of his office window, sees the bank he visits every day, and decides to rebel by robbing it from the very same room. There is no better heist than the mastermind watching everything from his chair with cup of coffee and a good cigar. He's THAT cool. :) Wouldn't you be a buggyboy, attend nice events with nice women or do whatever floats your boat if you had the money and looks? Bruce Wayne doesn't give it all either, just puts on his guilty cap to smacks some fools around. Thomas Crown is a more sophisticated superhero, but of the same breed.
He said he was fighting the system. He didn't like rules similar to the character Howard Roark in The Fountainhead. But Howard tried to change the system from within. Thomas beat the system with the system's rules. He knew how far he could go. Howard believed the system would apply their rules of conduct to him. They didn't. They both blew up the system, Thomas stealing money, and Howard his work. The one difference is Thomas ran when betrayed, Howard did not.
If we can save humanity, we become the caretakers of the world
Thomas did not "run". He could no longer operate playing the game by his rules in the States so he relocated. Do you understand the ending? The relationship was a cat-and- mouse affair between Thomas and Vicki. Thomas won that game as well.
shareNot to put too fine a point on it, but I believe if he could have won he would have stayed. They were going to catch him because of Vicki, so he ran, or left to avoid prosecution, probable jail time, and lost of income. I agree he could play the game anywhere, but if you have to pull up stakes and play somewhere else, you lost, just my opinion.
I have been bent and broken, but, I hope, into a better shape, Grimm
He did it because he could.
He was Steve McQueen, after all.
--
Grammar:
The difference between knowing your sh**
and knowing you're sh**.
Clearly most people here missed the point of the movie.
Firstly, the assumption that enough dough will solve all your problems. Clearly he is not particularly happy. Remember the scene at the airfield when the girl asks him why he undershoots the field? He responds to the question of his mortality with a line about it solving a lot of problems. The girl, who seems not to understand his position, asks what problems. He says something like "Who I want to be tomorrow".
Some of this is a bit of a peep at the dark side of capital and American capitalism. Norman Jewison is Canadian so it's a bit of an outsider's look at it. Making money is not an end in itself. It's like when you get to a point in your career where you can go no further. You look back on the start of it and think how you might have wanted to do that job for the rest of your career. After a while it becomes less challenging and consequently, less rewarding (there are other rewards besides money). You become bored.
Thomas Crown is in an elite group. The top of his field in...making money and lots of it. So he's been doing it for a while and now he's unfulfilled. He's reached the top and there's nowhere else to go. He has a superficially satisfying relationship but it's not enough either.
Above all, Thomas Crown is into power. He wants to beat the system - his way.
That's why he does it.
So he is in a way an anti-hero? A Crusader of justice? If that is so then that is great and if I were in his shoe, I would have done the same thing. Course if I did, I would have robbed from the NRA then donate the money to the victims of public shootings with in the last ten years LOL.
shareI suppose it makes as much sense as Faye Dunaway's character deciding Crown is the mastermind simply on the basis of his looks. Every time I see the film I keep wishing the one who she wrote off as being "too square" would turn out to be the culprit.
"I'm not reckless . . . I'm skillful!"
[deleted]
Even WORSE, he risked his life, home, wealth and reputation for a thrill. It would have been interesting to see how he would have dealt with boredom in a Federal Penitentiary. 👮😵🚔
shareSee Donald Trump and his 4 bankruptcies as well as Bernie Madoff etc. The wealthiest are the biggest thieves.
shareHe explains it at the end when he's in bed with Vicky. It's about him and the system.
share