MovieChat Forums > The Girl in the Park (2008) Discussion > was louise julias daughter?...

was louise julias daughter?...

posted 16 years ago by emma-600
22 replies | jump to latest

...we never actually end up seeing whether she has a birthmark or not as it was on maggies thigh wasnt it...and we never see louises thigh, at the end its like julia had decided in her mind that it just didnt matter and that it would make no difference...?

also why did louise put the picture of her and her family in julias album at the end. was it supposed to look like maggie? did she think she might have been maggie?

anyone have any ideas? am i simplylooking too deeply into this, is she just not julias daughter and thats it. i mean you desperatly want her to be dont you... but if she isnt then why bother with the pic in the album sequence...?

[–] tom_williams888 16 years ago

it couldnt of been her daughter. Think about it the girl was 3 when she went missing and 16 years later so that would mean seh was 19. Are you telling me that we are suppose to believe that Kate Bosworth is 19. She is at least 23, 24 and she srinks aswell which says that she defo over 21!!!

The director must think we were born yesterday!!!

im the best there is the best there was and the best there ever will be

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kate8277 15 years ago

Agreed! Without any offence meant to Tom, whom I'm sure was (or is) a very good boy who has neither smoked nor drunk under age, I would feel inclined to ask if he never watched Buffy, where the lead was played by an actress five years older than her character, or Back to the Future, where Marty McFly's character was played by a man about 10 years older than his character.

I sure as hell know that I started drinking in pubs at the age of 14, and now 27, if you go by the amount of people who ID me now, apparently I could EASILY play a 17 year old. :)

Anyway. I'd love to know whether or not Louise was Julia's child but I suppose we're never going to find out, but if the want and the belief is there, the hysteria over never finding out the fate of her child is bound to disappear but could easily return if she sees there isn't a birthmark, with possible added resentment over time 'wasted' on someone who is figuratively unimportant.

Little bit of folk psychology there... My apologies!!! :-D

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Thought_Criminal_J62377 11 years ago

Very stupid deduction Tom. You shouldn't try to guess the difference between even 25 and 19. The real way we know that Louise is not Julia's daughter is that Julia let's her back into her life, even after Louise admits the lie and then Louise put's her lost mother's picture in Julia's photo album, implying that they've adopted each other, as the other one's lost loved one.

I see Stupid People...

[–] Pegandvalent (1) a year ago

[deleted]

[–] tony-clifton 15 years ago

the birthmark was behind the knee, so no Louise is not Julia's daughter. That's revealed in the end but by that time Julia realized that wasn't important.

[–] Humboldtdda 15 years ago

Yeah, but what about the CD, that Louise's brother left? It had the same name as the Sigourney Weaver character (Julia), and it was dedicated "To Maggie." Was that CD from the performer at the night club that she went on the date to? (The photo looked similar) I think Louise bought it from the guy hawking CD's in Times Square. I have to be honest, I just did not like the ending of this movie. It just left you guessing too much. Julia was intensely studying that performer. I just really expected a surprise ending which would have been better. Julia's son said that there was another murder (similar circumstances to Maggie's disappearance) in Philadelphia, and that person supposedly confessed, but if so, where was the body? Law enforcement would always want information from a suspect on where the body is to bring closure to the family. A nice film, and well acted. I liked the NYC locations, but if it is based upon a play, it should have had a better ending is all I say.

[–] Gary-161 15 years ago

The CD is Sigourney Weaver's album. Sigourney Weaver finds the CD and realises this is how the girl knows her daughter's name and manipulated her to remain in her life. At the film's close we see that there may have been more than a mercenary reason why the girl wanted to stay in Sigourney's life.

[–] vaseline-pretty 15 years ago

Really?? So are you saying she told Stuart about the CD and told him to refer to her as Maggie? I didn't really understand the significance of Stuart in the movie....

[–] Gary-161 15 years ago

The brother and sister are close. Them against the world sort of thing. He helps her out. She sees him off at the depot.

[–] EllenRipley47 15 years ago

I think even Julia knew that the girl wasn't Maggie, though she desperately wanted her to be, hence the checking of her leg several times, even after she already saw that the birthmark wasn't there. But she didn't care, she just wanted to pretend and project her love and care on her because it made her feel better. And that's why she didn't care in the end. She just wanted someone to love and feel her void.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wgDmYPpG2I

[–] allisonarf 15 years ago

We see at the very end that Louise does not have a birthmark on her thigh and she is not Maggie. But Sigourney Weaver's character and Kate Bosworth's characters need each other to love and fill a void, so Weaver's character lets things go and doesn't out Louise as an imposter.

[–] tboll01 15 years ago

Allison and Gary are absolutely right. Louise is not the daughter and Sigourney knows and accepts it. But it doesn't change the fact that both of them acknowledge that they need each other. Sigourney continues to welcome Louise in her home/life and the gesture of Louise putting her picture in the album signifies that she wants to be Sigourney's daughter (and part of her most treasured photo album).

[–] aqui-3 14 years ago

I thought the significance of Louise putting the photo into the album was to let us know that her mum died, therefore letting us know that the reason Julia needed Louise was the same reason Louise needed Julia.

Crackin' film though, made me blub like an ikkle baby.

[–] Chrysanthepop 13 years ago

'Allison and Gary are absolutely right. Louise is not the daughter and Sigourney knows and accepts it. But it doesn't change the fact that both of them acknowledge that they need each other. Sigourney continues to welcome Louise in her home/life and the gesture of Louise putting her picture in the album signifies that she wants to be Sigourney's daughter (and part of her most treasured photo album).'

I agree. Even though Louise's methods were wrong, Julia knows that she gave her something she had lost 16 years ago. Louise also found a tenderness, closeness, affection and perhaps a kind of maternal love that she never knew she needed and to her Julia was the closest thing to family, next to her brother.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[–] twoflorins 13 years ago

the photo of louise junior/maggie junior that louise senior added to the album looked like her face had been superimposed onto the photo....only saw it quickly but that's what i thought....don't know what this might imply though....did louise senior do this on purpose, to appeal to SW's character and their mutual need for each other as discussed above...or do we imagine this is the director's doing...to me we are being told the film is open ended...because of the ambiguity of who altered the added photo...particularly if the birth mark issue is unresolved...though as the last few posts say. it looks like they just agree to maintain the relationship whatever the truth...

[–] marbleeye 13 years ago

In a metaphysical sense, she is the daughter of us all.

But she's still not getting a Christmas card.

[–] michaelexarkun 14 years ago

As others have stated, at the end Julia knew that Louise wasn't her daughter.

[–] katesfancydress 11 years ago

damn, the first time I watched it I was sure she was still her daughter, the second it is clear that she is not. Bit of a let down.

[–] Pegandvalent (1) a year ago

There is this mystery isn’t there. If a body was never found and if Louise was adopted then maybe she is her daughter and even if not. This girl Louise brings so much life and happiness in her life like never before. It’s obvious that Julia loves her beyond any truth. Moral of story love can happen anywhere anytime between people if you let it. I loved this movie..♥️

[–] veggie1968 (3) 10 months ago

Sadly, no. The writing has it "open" to it being possible...the location, the similar age but it's an extremely long shot for her to be alive and grown and randomly running into her mother, not to mention the "confession" from the man who took Maggie. Louise, though likeable at times, is simply a con artist and opportunist and using Julia's desperate need to have her daughter back to get what she needs, a home and to come and go as she pleases. She infiltrated Julia's life, and being alone in the apartment all day had plenty of time to go through her things and piece together what happened with Maggie and take on the role, to the point of making up the "black market" adoption thing to stay in control of Julia. It's evident that Julia realizes this and comes to terms with it and still accepts her, by calling her "Louise" at the end.