Patrick is a douchbag! No question what the right thing was! Leave the girl with loving parents. He took away her life by returning her to the mother .
shareBetter to take away a young child from a parent then? Even if it means killing a few people and framing others in the process? The mother didn't deserve the girl but not did Morgan Freeman
shareAnother person who condones scheming, lying, killing, elaborate setups, and faking a child's death. Oh and kidnapping
And you say Patrick is a douchebag?
Yes, taking a child out of a bad situation and giving them a better life will always get my vote.
share"Yes, taking a child out of a bad situation and giving them a better life will always get my vote."
Great. So pick a child in need and go take them.
I mean, we can expect you to do this, right? You think it's so morally superior and acceptable.
You can just have a conversation without being arguemetive. It's a pretty simple concept to understand; people have different morals, beliefs, and perception. I stated how I felt. Of course with anything, there are many layers to the situation. I hear your side and I understand why someone would see it that way, but I disagree
share"You can just have a conversation without being arguemetive."
What exactly about my post bothered you so much? Not just labeling it. What words? What questions?
Also.. I didn't proclaim a side. I'm asking you if you'd follow through on what you claim you would.
You said...
"Yes, taking a child out of a bad situation and giving them a better life will always get my vote."
Well, there's plenty of children out there in bad situations. When exactly are you going to take one? After all, it's okay. And it gets your vote.
Or did you just want a movie ending that made YOU feel warm inside?
If you still have objections then I'm sorry for taking you at your word, I guess?
"Great. So pick a child in need and go take them."
Do you mean that literally? Like do you really think its a great idea? Sounds patronizing.
Is your world that black and white? If this movie was a real situation that I was aware of I would turn my head and sleep better at night. Did I ever say all children? All negative situations? No, I didn't.
"Well, there's plenty of children out there in bad situations. When exactly are you going to take one? After all, it's okay. And it gets your vote."
Maybe you should take a deep breath, maybe put some ice on it. You are asking me when I'm going to take a kid? Jeez! I didn't realize I had something in the works. Not yet at least
First, it's noted that you made a sweeping generalization about my post. Then when asked for specifics words/questions you simply ignored the question. Got it. Generalizations are easy, I know.
"Like do you really think its a great idea? "
Um, have you been reading these posts you're making? YOU think it's a great idea. Our entire interaction has been based off the fact that I DON'T think it's a great idea and you DO. You've said repeatedly it "gets your vote" or you'd turn your "head and sleep better at night." How are you confused about this?
"Is your world that black and white?"
Again.. are you reading your posts? YOU think things are black and white. You think: Kidnapped child living in the country is better off because "well-off", "respectable", "loving" citizens kidnapped them. And, no... they're not actually respectable because they're neck deep in corruption and stealing money/children behind a badge. Also, that "well-off" country lifestyle is funded by corruption and theft. Also, that "love" is nothing more than a twisted form of grief they harbor from the loss of their own child and is INSEPARABLE from the lying, corruption and violence that took place around her kidnapping. She was a pawn in their game of self-enrichment.
THAT'S black and white. "See, it's okay because these kidnappers care." Please. Siding with Patrick-- which you do not-- means you see shades of grey. Doing the right thing comes with negatives. And, no.. they're not the same kind of illegal, corrupt, abuse of power negatives the cops you side with perpetrated in order to do a twisted, self-serving form of "the right thing."
You're absolving criminals to make black into white and not see it any other way. YOU live in a world of "black is white."
This movie asked too much of you emotionally so you boiled it down to a saccharine, easy to digest morsel.
"If this movie was a real situation that I was aware of I would turn my head and sleep better at night."
And you're surprised I think you're okay with kidnapping why? Also, you're leaving out the fact that you're dismissing CORRUPT COPS who are STEALING MONEY, FALSIFYING EVIDENCE and are willing to commit murder to keep it secret.
Let's say the kidnapping wasn't a crime for a second. The corruption, lying, evidence planting and theft still is. So she's legally taken (in this make believe scenario) by people who are still CRIMINALS. Why is the criminal activity not entered into your decision making? That house in the country really sold you, huh?
"Did I ever say all children? All negative situations? No, I didn't."
Oh, wow... I actually have to say this again now. ARE YOU READING YOUR POSTS?
YOU, 11/27/16: "Yes, taking a child out of a bad situation and giving them a better life will always get my vote."
To repeat... "always get my vote." For the cheap seats.. "ALWAYS."
"Maybe you should take a deep breath..."
HAHAHA. You're advocating in favor of kidnapping but I need to take a deep breath? Please, look up the term "projection" and re-read your posts.
My very first post...... A post about a movie and a single situation.
"Patrick is a douchbag! No question what the right thing was! Leave the girl with loving parents. He took away her life by returning her to the mother"
Was it illegal? Yes! But it was giving a child a better life. That is my opinion. That is how I feel about this situation, in this movie. What would she want if she had to answer that question now or 18 years from now? Neither you or I can answer that question with 100% certainty. However, the movie ended with the mother rushing out for a date and saying, "what about Amanda". Its pretty clear she hasn't changed. Again, I would have liked a different ending.
By your reaction to my first comment you would think I ended it with, "taking all children, out of all negative situations is always the 'morally superior and acceptable' thing to do".
But see, those were your words, not mine..
"Yes, taking a child out of a bad situation and giving them a better life will always get my vote."
Yes, this is a true statement. Who would not feel this way?
And yes, if this was a real situation, maybe on some alternate universe that I was on I would be completely ok with it. Sleep better at night. Reminder: it was a movie.
But, you take it to whole other level by saying...
"Great. So pick a child in need and go take them" and " Well, there's plenty of children out there in bad situations. When exactly are you going to take one? After all, it's okay. And it gets your vote"
"I mean, we can expect you to do this, right? You think it's so morally superior and acceptable"
Do you truly not see what you did with my words? Do you just want an argument? Nothing better to do with your time?
It comical how you actually ask me, "when exactly are you going to take one". Has anyone ever told you that maybe you're a bit dramatic?
Having a friendly debate is fun. People can disagree and still have a conversation without being argumentative. In fact plenty of people on this discussion board have opposing views on the ending. It's ok, you don't have to change peoples mind to aligns with what you believe is morally right.
In one comment you say, "Also.. I didn't proclaim a side" and the next talk to me like I'm the one missing something by saying, Our entire interaction has been based off the fact that I DON'T think it's a great idea and you DO. So what is it?
This conversation is pointless. Like I said, is the world really that black and white? Do you see why I said that in the first place? I made a comment about a movie, followed up by stating that there are many layers to the situation and that I can understand the opposing view, however your responses just continue to be completely over the top. As if my feeling for a movie (and yes maybe even a similar real life situation) is equal to me putting on a cape and kidnapping all the mistreated children in the world.
"You think: Kidnapped child living in the country is better off because "well-off", "respectable", "loving" citizens kidnapped them. And, no... they're not actually respectable because they're neck deep in corruption and stealing money/children behind a badge. Also, that "well-off" country lifestyle is funded by corruption and theft. Also, that "love" is nothing more than a twisted form of grief they harbor from the loss of their own child and is INSEPARABLE from the lying, corruption and violence that took place around her kidnapping. She was a pawn in their game of self-enrichment."
WOAH! "You think" Jeez! Now you know what I think?
Not your opponent's fault you can't see the dangerous slippery slope your thinking creates.
share"Yes, taking a child out of a bad situation and giving them a better life will always get my vote."
The LDS church used to have a program to take Indian children away from their parents and give them to white people to raise so they'd have a better life (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Placement_Program). It was still in place during Spencer Kimball's lifetime. Do you see the slippery slope? If the situation is problematic, you change the culture and/or the laws. You don't subject individuals to a double standard.
Admittedly his decision was a difficult one. But he did what was morally right. It was the job of social services to ensure that Amanda was then raised correctly. They failed. Had Patrick left Amanda with Doyle, it would have opened up a whole feed asking when children should be removed from parents. No matter how lapse the child protection services are, it doesn't make it right to take matters into your own hands. So as much as the ending was horrible, it unfortunately was what had to be done.
shareI have to agree. And I also agree with the comment saying there is no right answer. Amanda may have grown up a much better person being with the couple, but you can't look the other way over a crime such as kidnapping. And it's painful to realize this isn't merely a movie, imagining how many kids are raised in truly awful environments.
This is one of the saddest movies I can recall, and I don't think I'll watch it again, but it is powerful.
[deleted]
He did not do the moral thing. The mother says when the girl is returned that never take your eyes off your kid, but she was going to leave her kid alone to go on a date. She is scum and the moral thing to do was to leave her with a loving family that was actually going to listen to her, love her, care for her. The mother didn't care at all about her. It was immoral to leave her with her mother. You all are confusing morality with legality.
She is a horrible woman that didn't give a damn about her child. He now has the responsibility of caring for the child until she is 18, he messed up.
If he allowed it- he's putting himself in risk of getting in trouble. Kid napping is no joke. He did the right thing IMO. And he explained why perfectly.
shareThe movie's writers meant to make the viewer agonize over which would have been better for the girl, knowing that there was no "right" answer. You and everyone else in this thread took the bait (as did I).
My people skills are fine. It's my tolerance of morons that needs work.
totally agree. i want to punch casey affleck's character in the face about 1000 times!!!
share