sorry for my bad en, cause it's not my native language
anyway
I really confuse after i was watching this movie
you know ,I think it's inequitable punishment & why was she a cruel like that
i just want to say it s too much
what is your opinion ?
I have to say that it was a real harsh punishment. If I were Gerard Butler, the moment she would try to kiss me in the end I would have given her the heaviest slap she had ever tasted.................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sharei for one think he had it coming. at the end of the day, the child wasnt hurt in any way, his money and career were still intact and all he was left with was the same feeeling she experienced for months. very interesting movie. i like.
I AM REALLY OFFENDED BY PEOPLE WHO WILL GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO GET OFFENDED.
[deleted]
I would divorce her. He was humbled and felt some of what she had gone through but she was not justified in doing what she did. she could and should have divorced him but then there would have been no film:)
shareWhen it was all over, he was probably just thankful that his wacko wife didn't kill him.
sharei think most of you are missing the point Tom
says it when he say he felt like his whole life
had been torn up. Neil was a liar i think if he had said to her
that he was having the affair with Judy she may have been able to
forgive him but after all they were through he still lied
he cheated in business, on his wife and bascially would have killed
Judy rather that try to tackle Tom for the phone i don't doubt
he loved his child but for him to go out after that and still
lie to abby show what a loser he really is
I'd go back and get the gun that was registered to Pierce Brosnan's character, and shoot her with it. Then when Pierce went to jail for life, I'd marry his wife and have her adopt my daughter.
Of course I would shoot her somewhere where it was slow and painful.
She didn't really consider, that the key risk in the whole plan was that her husband could easily have killed Tom Ryan, on one of the many occasions presented to him that he didn't take. If he had done, then given her role in conspiring with Ryan to 'punish' her husband, she would be implicated directly and the end result quite possibly being that they both wind up in prison, and lose the kid.
Nice thinking
I agree, she is sooooo crazy. I am female and I was disgusted by her behavior at the end of the movie. And to everyone who says that she didn't use the child, YES SHE DID! While the child was not in immediate danger, she psychologically USED the child against Neil, that is still using the child. It can be compared to telling your ex husband that your child doesn't want to see him and thinks of your new boyfriend as their father (it hurts the ex husband more than the ex wife could imagine). She has some serious issues to work out, and she would have been smarter to just to confront him-in the car after they left for the evening would have been a good time or present him with divorce papers-again in the car would have been a good time. I noticed that someone had said this already and a couple people put, well then you've never been in love...I don't think that is an issue really because I have seen people be cheated on and loved their spouse very much, but still divorced them because they realized that their cheating spouse didn't love them-they cheated. She obviously didn't love Neil very much because she went to such extremes to purposely hurt him (yes I know-he cheated-but two wrongs DON'T make a right no matter how you look at it). How horrible would she have felt if he died in the process, or killed someone (like Ryan or his wife?). How would she explain that to the cops who come-"Oh sorry officer...my husband thought that this man had kidnapped our child and he had to go to the top of this clock tower and he fell because he's afraid of heights". How would she explain that to her daughter?..."Sorry, honey, daddy killed a man whom he believed took you away and was going to hurt you, now he's going to be in prison for 50 years." What she did is wrong, and if I was Neil I would have told her that she was a stupid crazy B!TCH and that I would be divorcing her and seeking full custody. He could have used the money he still had to hire an great attorney who could find proof of Abby and Ryan's contacts when they were conspirirng and use that against her (I would also try to convince Ryan's wife to divorce him and use the same attorney). I personally don't think she is a fit wife and should be supervised as a mother.
shareI'd file a police report against both Tom and Abby. They both committed multiple crimes, including felonies. Abby would not be off the hook legally just because she was Neil's wife.
http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies
to answer JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies
If they had, the secrets the company had, was going to leak out, so his life as he knew it, would be over. Plus it sounds like he did quite alot of crimes for the companies, so he would probably also be facing jale if he reported them.
I however can't say that what they did was worse then what he did.
Committing adultary is playing with other persons feelings, and they played it back on him. Plus he had actually promised he wouldn't be cheating by getting married. And I think a promise should be treated more heavily then when no promise is made.
Report the *beep* to the police, lock them up. You'll have sole custody of the child.
Of course, getting proof will be abit harder.
I think she went a bit too far, but it is a movie and I ended up really liking her character at the end.
They way the whole thing came together was great, turned an ordinary movie into a decent thriller.
I dont think she was cruel, just wanted him to understand. She wasnt that nuts about it, I think all woman or men should do that if their partner cheats, might stop the mass amounts of disloyalty that couples have in these modern days.
So, after reading every post in this thread, I don’t even know where to start, but I really feel like trying. Yes, I am a woman, but I would not call myself a feminist, still, there is no denying that after reading the majority of the posts here, feminists seem to be right on with their arguments and I’ll try to explain why. Men I understand, it’s the easy way out, why let a man take the blame if a woman can take it instead? But for the women here to actually agree without questioning anything? Come on now!
Let me try and tell you what I mean with some examples:
1. Evidently when reading some responses, EVERYTHING that happened was the “psycho wife’s fault”. Why does everything, every single part of that "devil’s plan" have to be the wife’s? What if the cheated-on-husband came up with the original idea instead, or what if he came up with or changed so much that the plan basically became his plan? No, revenge was on Abby right?
2. Why is it so hard to understand that NOTHING would ever have happened if he had not cheated on her from the beginning, which yes, would not have made a movie, but still basic line, she is not to blame here, HE is. He brought this on himself, and even if the wife could have done something else, why not do this (still does not mean that it was her plan) and in reality do nothing except for lying? “She’s a psycho mom that uses her child” you say, well I have got news for you, what does it take for a father that only cares about his daughter when she’s in some sort of danger to understand what a pathetic, selfish bastard he is? Evidently this, and let’s hope he gets it right this time around shall we!? After everything they went through, after all the *beep* he still has the nerve to lie about being a cheater for the second time around? What? And he’s the victim here, really?
Or how about this, I know it’s a movie, and a stunt like this would not be possible in real life, but for the sake of argument let’s say this happened. So he, the carrying and loving father who’s the victim, was about to risk his daughters life from the very start at the scene at the bank. First he lies about how much money they have (eh, how much money is your kid worth big guy?) and then, he wants to call the police instead of giving the supposed kidnapper the money to save his own daughter. I mean seriously, he did not know that the “kidnapper” eventually not really wanted the money, so why not wait it out and take the chance since most kidnappers actually only want the money (if they’re not pedophiles’ etc.)? Why risk her life at that point?
Finally, the meaning of this movie is simple; torture takes many forms, especially physical torture, but psychological mind games, so much more effective. What she did was nothing and everything all at the same time. He only got a good look at the mirror, something many people need but never get, and that is why this, if possible to pull through in real life, would be like someone giving you a second chance at being a “good” human being and a “good” father. Good is written “good” in this sense because it is relative, a good person and father to me could be/mean something different to others for example.
So, if I was him, I’d start over, with or without my wife, and this time have my child’s best interest in mind and not my own (he could have divorced his wife instead of hurting his family because let’s face it, even if it’s indirect, the kid still gets hurt). And if I was her, I would have divorced him the first time around, but in this case, I would divorce him now. Love goes both ways, and if one of the ways gets shut or does not exist in the first place, in the end there is nothing. And yes, I know the original question only was about what *he* would do, but this one's on me.
Can I first preface this comment by saying that I totally understand the point of the film and the revenge that Abby planned. I know that the child was never in actual danger and that Neil was a grade A *beep* That being said:
To Change_xD:
You claim to have considered every post on this board but you've clearly disregarded most of what's been said. To my recollection, nobody (seriously) believes that Neil was innocent or that he didn't deserve some form of comeuppance. The issue is about how far Abby took it.
Regardless of what's happened between the parents, children should not be used as weapons, whether the child is aware or not. The fact that the daughter was never in physical danger is irrelevant, Abby let Neil think that she was. The vast majority of parents would agree that this was out of order (indeed the majority of the posts on these boards have the same opinion). It has nothing to do with the fact that the antagonist of the film was a woman, had the roles been reversed I (and I would like to think that most other people) would still be on these boards, stating that Neil had taken it too far. Please don't don't reduce the conversation to an argument about sexism.
I think you're clutching at straws to find as many ways to blame Neil as possible. He's far from innocent and made a lot of bad decisions but I think him wanting to call the police had more to do with not trusting the kidnappers than trying to protect his money. How can say with any degree of certainty that most kidnappers only want the money? Maybe it's just easier to kill the hostage than return them and run the risk of being identified? He doesn't have any guarantee that the kidnappers would return his daughter once he paid up so I don't think you can really blame Neil for wanting to get the authorities involved.
As far as "Why does everything, every single part of that "devil’s plan" have to be the wife’s?", she claimed the credit at the end, therefpre she also takes the blame.
I really can't understand how you believe Abby did nothing wrong.
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men"
Let me just start by saying thank you, finally a respond! That being said let me try and make my standpoints clearer. Sorry for all the text though, I just want to explain as good as possible and there is so much to say...
By considering every post, it does not mean I made a summary out of everything and decided to see what most people think, I just thought that waaay too many actually blame EVERYTHING on Abby, who also happens to be a woman, for everything (not even her partner in crime “takes a bullet” and he happens to be a man). At least some of the other posts about Abby being *the devil* did not say anything else by writing it for me and others to read, so that leaves me thinking that they either don’t blame him at all (not likely) or just not enough. The issue as you put it is not really that obvious, but yes, lets at least agree on the fact that it’s about how far Abby went. Of course she went *too far*, when the whole plan is unrealitic in the first place! Still, that’s not the real problem in my opinion. The fact that she is to blame for everything is my first problem. Sexism or not, you decide for yourself and I’ll still claim I see a pattern. Sure, saying nothing about what part Neil plays in this does not mean that people consider him being a saint, but if you just bring up Abby and not mention him, then that is my second problem because you can’t just take something out of it's context and analyze it in a rightful way (like Abby's actions). These are my statements.
So, regarding Abby, using a kid is one thing and lying to someone about the child, like the child's father is another. She only heart Neil by lying to him about their child, so, it's like a “mind game” only for Neil. Now my whole point is that Neil got what he asked for and I think I made it pretty clear why, but let me say it again. He got a good look in the mirror and a second chance at being a "better person", if you may. Do I think the mind game was over the top, yes, do I think it's a good way of handling the situation, no, but like I've said it’s a movie and in real life this would not truly be possible. Since it's a movie though, I don't think that what she did was that bad, and note this, in relation to what HE did. See, Neil started it, but Abby and the other man finished it. To use the child by messing with Neil’s head without hurting the kid, when HE actually was the one who made that "messing” considerable in the first place by being such a *beep*, does not make it ok to only consider Abby to be the devil here. If you just look at her, then she's crazy, but if you look at the whole picture, Neil is to blame, and frankly, if I would go a bit too far here myself, how can he be considered a "good father" at all when he does something like that to his family? I don't think that cheating is the worst thing you can do to your partner, we're humans, but within a family it's kind of a big deal and what it comes down to is that it would have made a big enough difference if he had gotten a divorce instead, or learnt from his previous misstakes. Every time he went to have some *fun* with another woman, that was a few less hours he spent with his family and daughter and that is rather pathetic. Even a stepfather could have been a "better father" then. You don't like your wife, fine, that's one thing, but to hurt your kid like that, there is no excuse. Besides killing, that is one of the worst things you could do to your child as a parent, to not be there or be there but in the wrong way.
And one more thing, the bank scene I mentioned, what you say is very much your opinion about kidnappers and you are entitled to stick with that, but I still think that he made a bad move there, not his worst perhaps, but a really stupid one. I mean sure, a kidnapper could actually end up killing the hostage, but if you ask for my opinion I still believe that criminals in general prefer robbery, or something similar to that, on their record instead of murder as well (nothing that’s carved in stone).
Finally, I really don't understand why You think that I think that Abby did nothing wrong(!)? I just felt like accusing the real “wacko” of this film and that is Neil. Yes, I don’t recommend Abby’s actions to anyone, but I think that if you put it the right context (and remember that it’s a movie) it makes a lot more sense than if you just start analyzing her as a lunatic and Neil as the victim, because that is the feeling I had after reading a lot of the posts here (again, not in every single one) where his involvement is not mentioned or just seen as *nothing* compared to her. If Neil had not done anything to them and Abby just did this *out of the blue* to hurt him, then yes, it's on her, but in this case, he also "used" the love and trust of his child while being selfish. He abuses the child’s love in one sense, and she then "uses" the child to play a mind trick on him. This is one way of putting it and I at least can look at it that way while others may not, but that’s also where we differ. She is not heartless in using the child, if he is not as well; you see where I’m going here with the connection? If what she did affected him (not the child at all) in such a bad way, then thank god everything turned out to be a lie, except for that feeling he felt when he thought it was true (which COULD turn out to be one of the best things that happened to him, like when you have a near-death-experience). Using the child as a weapon by only affecting the other parent in a constructive way, or taking it for granted while being selfish? Not a huge moral difference to me, but again, Abby's actions are rather unrealistic.
And last but not least, I really don't recall her taking the blame for EVERYTHING having to do with *the plan* at the end. To me it felt more like she took responsibility for being a part of it, but, I've also only watched the movie once and might have missed the part where her partner simply acted under her command. I felt like he got too much out of it for that...
It looks's like we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I fully respect your opinion but I can't bring myself to follow it.
I understand it's only a movie (and a far-fetched one at that) but I really wish you wouldn't use that fact to make a point. We're discussing the actions in context so the fact that "it wouldn't happen in real life" is irrelevant.
Neil's a scumbag - there can be no dispute about that - and in no way would I want to decry the consequences of adultery. However if you were to ask a parent would they rather be told that a) their partner was cheating on them or that b) their child had been kidnapped, I'm pretty sure they'd tell you there's no comparison.
I really don't think sexism has a part to play in this argument (on this board). I believe that if you could find another film which reversed the roles, you would see that the lion's share of outrage would be aimed at the man. I think the reason that your failing to find much blame pointed at Neil on this particular board is that it's purpose was to discuss Neil's reaction to Abby's admission at the end.
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men"
@ Celluloid_Junkie83:
Let me begin by saying I agree with your point that if the roles were reversed and Neil had carried out the same insane plan then I, and most others here (I hope anyway), would be saying HE had taken it too far and SHE should head for the hills with the kid.
Let me also add that I am the child of a serial adulterer. My father had at least twenty affairs that me and my wonderful late mum, God rest her, were aware of; there may well have been many more. However she would NEVER, and I mean NEVER have done what Abby did. No truly loving parent would; well, not and sleep at night.
I have a 12 year old daughter, I would NEVER, and I mean NEVER use her against her father in ANY way, least of all this kind. Whatever fall out there is in a relationship between parents, the children should NEVER be used as a weapon of revenge; most people have no idea of the damage it causes the child in the end, particularly emotionally.
Additionally; as has been pointed out by others here and on other threads for this movie, there were MANY, MANY variables that could've gone horribly wrong, after all no plan is ever really perfect, and then how would abby have explained it to her daughter? Her husband falling to his death, killing the mistress or her husband and getting sent to jail? Losing control of the car and crashing....so many variables it scared me as to how many times her 'perfect plan' could've fallen apart so horribly.
I found Brosnan's character utterly under her thumb, his own bitter need for revenge allowing her to control him like a trained dog. So again, she has to shoulder the main part of the blame. Again though, if the roles were reversed, I would be saying the same about Neil and the mistress.
Neil was scum of the first order for cheating on his wife, I add this with the bitterness of my own first hand knowledge; I know,as I have said, from first hand experience the pain and suffering this causes the spouse that it is cheated on. My mum, bless her, suffered terribly each and every time; she stayed because SHE, at least, took her marriage vows seriously - shame my father didn't. However Abby was WRONG, VERY wrong and on many, MANY levels; that's it....end of story.
There, to me at least, will NEVER be ANY justification for telling a cheating spouse their child has been kidnapped and will be MURDERED if rules are not followed; and then take that spouse on some wild goose chase to supposedly 'save' the child before smilingly telling them it was a 'game' to show them how it hurts to be cheated on....it's mental cruelty that goes very much into sadism in my opinion. The fact that Abby seemed to be sadistically enjoying Neil's torment only goes to show that; and I have watched this movie a couple of times because of posting on these threads.
To be honest if I had found out that my late mum, God rest her, *had* pulled such a cruel stunt on my cheating father I would've blamed her full as much as I now do him for such actions. However, thankfully, my mum was a really wonderful lady with more sanity, poise and wisdom than Abby obviously ever hoped to have. My mum, bless her, was certainly not a vindictive and sadistic personality like Abby.
If I was Neil I would take my daughter, the money and some passports and vanish into the ether. He wouldn't be the first parent to do so; Abby is quite obviously deranged and not fit to be a parent....unsupervised at least. However, as Abby pointed out, she arranged it so he can't go to the authorities to get custody of their daughter; so vanishing with the child is his only real option to ensure both their safeties in this instance. Abby is obviously somewhat mad; only someone who is an idiot would stay with her after this...
After all, as has also been pointed out on other threads for this movie...what if she suspected him of having another affair in the future, even if he wasn't? What if she decided some *other* real or imagined slight against her by him deserved similar 'punishment'? What next? The child really IS kidnapped by some 'tame' criminals she's hired? Or she murders the child herself to 'pay' Neil back? Let's face it she definitely wouldn't be the first parent to profess their love for their children, only to go on to murder them as revenge against an estranged spouse.
No, I think Abby IS the main 'bad guy' here; as a woman, wife, mother AND as a daughter of a serial adulterer I think I can speak for the main here. Abby *was* WRONG in each and every way - end of story. Oh and, to reiterate for others who are trying to turn this into an argument on sexism; if it had been Neil who carried out this sadistic 'plan', I would be saying to Abby - take the kid, the money and passports and RUN. It doesn't matter who is the perpetrator, only that the actions were wrong and the one who carried them out sadistically insane.
Just *beep* with Maria Bello (she is soooo hot)
----------------------------------------------
i just want to spend my money to a good movie
The irony is...after all of this, he didnt lose anything...and she said; "Do you feel it, baby?"
The most convincing part is when he was about to kill Tom Ryan's unfaithful wife. That was when it was at the breaking point. I felt as if, things were "back to normal" in that Ryan had revealed what was going on, got a few shots in at Neil, scared the hell out of his wife...this seemed a bit too much for revenge, but to whose satisfaction? Still not be good enough?, gave her away... I think she strived a bit too hard to be the perfect wife, and Neil cheated anyway.
It came down to her forcing him to face life without them both. Brosnan as Ryan played his role flawlessly.
Well in my opinion the whole thing is really stupid. I mean yeah you *beep* with the guy emotionally and all that but at the end his wife is basically rubbing in his face that she's gone. Oh jeez you totally got him...it's not like he's a successful ad man that can't find someone better. If anything he can just go shack up with that babysitter. I liked the movie I just feel like, he moves on with a *beep* load of cash, a beautiful house, and the love of his daughter and will eventually find a nice piece of a**. In the end all is right in the world.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
i was having affair with and make new life without insane people.
share