MovieChat Forums > Love Actually (2003) Discussion > Reaction to scene where Emma Thompson's ...

Reaction to scene where Emma Thompson's character 'overreacts'.

posted 8 years ago by fdsamara
26 replies | jump to latest

Hello everyone,

I've read a lot of posts on here where people are saying that Harry could've been waiting till Christmas Day to give her the necklace and her assuming that he was having an affair was unwarranted. But I disagree. If you pay attention to the husband he's not a very affectionate and romantic guy. For example whenever they meet up Karen is always kissing Harry on the cheek. Or even when the side chick asked him to get her something he said something about if she needed stationary supplies. And he keeps giving his wife scarves for Christmas.

After being his wife for so long she would probably know him enough to not expect surprises like that. Also during that Christmas party, you'd have to be pretty naive to not suspect something when your husband is dancing with a girl dressed like a slut on Halloween.
But that's just my opinion. I didn't write the movie :-)

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

i think it's pretty clear in that scene that she picks that present because it is the only one the right size to be the necklace box, there clearly isn't any necklace coming. and i also agree that she probably already has some inkling that he fancies the girl he was dancing with at the office party, it was easy for her to put two and two together and realise the necklace had gone to someone else. She must have had the idea at the back of her mind that it was uncharacteristic of her husband to sucdenly buy her an expensive necklace when he'd always bought her boring scarves before.

[–] turniphead2 8 years ago

Totally agree!! Also, she definitely had at least a feeling that Harry had a thing for the skanky assistant because she specifically brings her up to him after the party saying something about her being pretty and to be careful with that or something to that effect.

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

It's the thought that counts. She is lucky she got anything at all. Furthermore, a Joni Mitchell CD is a perfectly fine gift.

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

it's not an acceptable gift from your husband if he's bought an extremely expensive gift for his mistress. that would piss anyone off.

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

Well, it's not the husband's fault that his wife got old and undesirable. Do you want him to fake his way through the marriage?

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

What i want is neither here nor there. The question was whether Emma Thompson overreacts to finding out her husband has bought an expensive gold necklace for another woman, and only given her a crappy cd. And of course it's not an overreaction. She loves her husband and is distressed that he is apparently in love with someone else. Of course she's upset. She may be older and less desirable than the tart her husband's having an affair with, but that's not her fault either. you may feel he is justified in having an affair because his wife is no longer young and lovely, but you could hardly expect her to be pleased about it.

[–] planetmutty 8 years ago

You are quite right, of course, Louise. She had every right to be upset about a young skank in the office getting a necklace costing 270 quid while she gets a CD. I hardly think she overreacted. If anything, she seemed to show a lot of restraint. And confronting him the way she did was pretty classy I thought.

Then again, maybe it's just me. Now in my mid-50s so perhaps I'm just getting old, but I find Emma Thompson way more appealing than the office tart.

Just to be clear though, when did the affair start? All I seem to remember was the skank quite obviously playing up to him a few times during the film, with little or no reaction from him. Then we see him Christmas shopping and he buys her the necklace. At that point I didn't even think they were involved. Is that when it started? Did I miss something prior to that?

When I said I wanted to be a comedian, they all laughed at me. Well, they're not laughing now!

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

I think it is one of the weaknesses of the film that alan. Rickman's character barely seems interested in the girl who throws herself at him, yet later in the film she asks him if he's going to buy her a present, he doesn't even seem that interested then, yet he buys her an expensive necklace, which suggests a definite interest in her. But we don't get any sense of him being at all passionate or romantic about her. It is a strange affair.

[–] Suzume-san 8 years ago

I'm sure I've read somewhere that there was supposed to be an explanation of why she was throwing herself at him like that, but it got missed out. It's not in the Deleted Scenes, so perhaps it was scripted but never shot. Pity.

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

Must we call the young woman a "tart" and a "skank"? That seems a little immature. She simply craves love.

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

She is blatantly throwing herself at a married man, and doing it moreover right under his wife's nose. i would call that tarty behaviour myself.

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

Yeah well he's the one who was lured away. Apparently he wasn't happy with his wife if another woman could so easily win his affection.

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

He doesn't behave well either. But she starts it. She is quite blatant in her advances to him.

[–] planetmutty 8 years ago

True, he didn't behave well at all. And she was pretty blatant. I doubt she was looking for love. I suspect she was just looking to get laid.

And when she sits in her chair and faces him and slightly widens her legs to a man she knows to be married, well I'd call that pretty skanky behaviour.

When I said I wanted to be a comedian, they all laughed at me. Well, they're not laughing now!

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

And when she sits in her chair and faces him and slightly widens her legs to a man she knows to be married, well I'd call that pretty skanky behaviour.

She's a woman with needs. Furthermore, that thing isn't gonna lick itself.

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

THen she should get a man of her own, not someone else's husband.

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

The heart wants what the heart wants.

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] Dreamsville 8 years ago

Oh, it's the heart that we're talking about here? I could have sworn it was something else.

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

Is the "something else" the woman's vulva?

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] planetmutty 8 years ago

No, the other V word, the vagina.

Is she after love or after sex? She could be after both but personally I think she's only after sex and is happy to chase a married man who is weak enough to succumb. Childish or not, I still she's a skank.

When you've made up your mind which (i.e. love or sex), let us know.

When I said I wanted to be a comedian, they all laughed at me. Well, they're not laughing now!

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

I agree. there is no sign at all that I can see that she loves him. She's a hussy.

[–] Pellam33 (378) a year ago

Jealous are we?

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Kewl_Kat 8 years ago

The vulva includes the vaginal opening and also the clitoris.

I'm a real kewl kat.🐈

[–] Dreamsville 8 years ago

Must we call the young woman a "tart" and a "skank"?

I'm afraid we must. If the shoe - or in this case, necklace fits... :)

[–] litafbaby 8 years ago

For one, he's a prize idiot because he should've bought two. Secondly, I found his coworker to be obnoxious, rude, selfish and making him uncomfortable considering he is obviously not affectionate nor was he showing interest in her.
And everytime I watched this I just wished his wife had mentioned it sooner; probably because I cried with her ?, but also because she was jumping to all the wrong conclusions. However, I also felt like he could've been honest from the gate about his annoying coworker and still got them both jewelry.