... kill Bridget Fonda's character?
I can't believe that as a man he will get this mad at her when he was simply not in the mood and she could utter a word and he goes mad and bam, ends her life like that.
"when he was simply not in the mood"
He was simply not right in the head. Duh!
I meant was that she could've made him this angry and that he would resort to pulling a gun out and using it on her like that.
shareHe was simply not right in the head. Duh!
shareI didn't really know especially BEFORE the incident that his character was supposed to be a mentally damaged criminal psychopath of some sort, so I was referring to that incident alone and the "reason" he was so triggered as in his "motivation" rather than what he may have been like, and even if he was not right in the head, why was his THIS trigger sensitive?
shareIt goes to show the ruthlessness of the character. They weren't the smartest people. But its one the the funniest scenes in the movie. "Luuuuuisssssss"......Pow!
shareWell, it wasn't really that funny overall, an innocent woman was murdered, don't see how you could laugh much about it.
shareHer dying wasn't funny. The style and reason he killed her was funny. And ultimately, it's only a movie. Don't take it too seriously.
shareOf course I know that. But still...
Plus, when it comes to one particular type of material, and possibly maybe some others, even in a fictional movie where its completely fake, people DO legitimately complain and may feel outraged.
Bruh, are you upset about every death, in every movie?
shareNope. :)
shareNot to mention, many gory horror movies are among my all time favourites.
share"Bruh, are you upset about every death, in every movie?"
Sigh, cough cough...
Puts hands over heart, gets down on one's knees, focuses the mind 100% ONLY on this matter and utters emphatically:
Even if that WAS the case, does that make it wrong to do so and even if its not, does it make it wrong NOT to do so? Plus...
Fiction or not, with occasionally other material, even if fakes and in movies, people DO react in similar ways at least SOMETIMES. And in others as well...
So is it really wrong or right or even incorrect and illogical to do so? Final question - what IS the right way here?
Cheers.
an innocent woman was murdered, don't see how you could laugh much about it
Even so, that doesn't justify her getting killed and even more than that - for simply uttering another word after being told to be quiet by an unhinged psycho?
shareWho justified it?
shareDe Niro's character probably did in his own crazy mind in that scene.
shareWell he was a psychotic criminal fresh out of jail so it's definitely a possibility.
As to whether it was funny or not, I also laughed when Marvin got accidentally shot in the face in PF. I wouldn't laugh at a man getting shot in the face IRL though. It's totally fine to laugh at Mel getting shot out of the blue like that.
Theman18 has to be trolling
sharebecause it was funny? She wasn't innocent, she was literally in on the job.
shareAlso, SPOILERS - is that why Samuel L. Jackson's character shot him in that van, as a vengeance for the act?
shareBecause he liked Melanie and was really pissed that Louis killed her over something as silly as her being annoying. That and they got played….Louis is supposed to be a professional and acted very amateur.
He just didn’t have the coolness and levelheadedness of the polished and urbane Max Cherry.
He's basically putting down Louis like a mad dog. His brain is cooked, he's a total mess and a liability, can't be trusted. He definitely could have lived with his girl getting murdered if there was just cause. But one day Louis might just decide to shoot him. He had to go.
shareLouis also didn’t get the money…that may have been the last straw.
shareWhen he gives his "your ass used to be beautiful" speech, it's clear that Louis used to be a high end operator. But now he's not even a useful henchman. He's not even putting him out of his misery so much as just taking out the trash. The "real Louis" died years ago in prison.
shareYeah pretty much
sharehe was just unhinged in general
shareWhat I always wondered, why Tarantino didn't actually SHOW her being shot. It's not that he generally wouldn't show a person being killed. But this one is totally off screen. Intentionally or maybe the footage of Bridget receiving a bullet just looked unsatisfying?
shareYou thought it might've made the scene more ambiguous and intriguing that way, maybe she didn't die but simply got hurt?
shareWhat I always wondered, why Tarantino didn't actually SHOW her being shot. It's not that he generally wouldn't show a person being killed. But this one is totally off screen. Intentionally or maybe the footage of Bridget receiving a bullet just looked unsatisfying?
---
I guess we will never know -- I've never seen Tarantino explain it -- but it was VERY noticeable in the movie at the time and that gives it a certain "Directorial power": WHY did he choose to do it that way? The comedy leads to shock(he shoots her) and then to...mystery? Hey, why no shot of her going down..and the second shot after she fell? Usually such a shot is EXPECTED..maybe REQUIRED ...to "pay off" the murder scene.
But QT didn't give it to us. Writer-directors have all sorts of power to tell their stories. Here is a perfect example of how that power is used.
Years later, The Sopranos similarly elected not to show us the actual shooting murder of key female character Adrianna in the woods by Mafioso Silvio -- there was no surprise to that one(we knew she was going to die) but...perhaps both Tarantino and the Sopranos makers did not want to make us watch an attractive young woman take bullets?