As so as it showed her hugging the dead body in the dumpster, I immediately lost interest. It looked stupid, the feds would have stopped her and removed her from the scene.
shareEntirely realistic. Nothing would stop a mother from getting to her child. Sadly, I know this from having lost my 18-year-old son two years ago. Julia Roberts' portrayal of the pain upon seeing her dead child to shock as she sits on the curb and asks, "Where are we?" to the drastic change in appearance 13 years later - dull hair, tired looking face that has no expression, eyes that are sometimes flat and other times appear haunted - she nailed it. I look in the mirror and that's the woman (mom) I've become. I don't expect people to understand, and more importantly I don't want anyone to understand. If you do understand, you're living it, and that's devastating in the simplest form.
shareAgreed. Sorry for your loss.
shareSome become numb, like I did, others become violent and for a while I myself became the walking dead, get up, take a piss, let the dog out, eat, and go back to sleep, this became a routine until I met my current relationship and against the odds, had another kid again, against the odds. I could have become violent, like that drug addict in Vermont who killed the Social worker, but chose a better path, but I'm not the same either, When the movie, "Gran Torino " came out, I became him and still am, it's how I cope, grrrrrrrr get of my lawn!
So Jess losing her cool and thought is totally possible.
Spoiler alert for them spoil sports out there! Y'all like spoiled milk, stop crying over it!
Michelle, I lost my daughter as well, albeit under different circumstances, so I knew exactly what the character was going through. From the moment she discovered her daughter in the dumpster, her life was destroyed. When she was hugging her body, I was crying my eyes out because I know the pain. When something like this happens, you completely change and how you view the horrible, unfair world we live in and of course other people who mostly live in a bubble. I think the movie actually portrayed the grieving mother very well and Julia did an excellent job.
shareWell, she WAS the feds, so considering she and Ray were the only people who knew at that point, it's possible that she wouldn't be stopped until she got to it. And as far as her stopping herself...Who could blame her? It's her child in there. Reason goes right out the window.
What I've got in my head you can't buy, steal, or borrow. I believe in live and let live.
No, it wasn't a movie mistake, it was her mistake. Not a mistake actually, as she was so carried away by emotion. This was made even more evident when she ripped off her gloves so she could touch the corpse with her bare hands.
The cops tried to stop her knowing full well that she was contaminating evidence, but they gave up. Couldn't pull a wailing mom away from her dead kid.
That sh!t would never happen. People kill me when trying justify unrealistic movie scenes. Forensic Science is a fvcking thing and you cannot mess up a crime scene period. That's when cops truly fvck up.
Clark's destiny = Superman, LL &LL.
People kill me when trying justify unrealistic movie scene. As well they should...if it is unrealistic.
you cannot mess up a crime sceneYou sure can. She did. That scene is a perfect example of how you could mess it up. What could have her friends done? She was already IN the dumpster. You can't un-mess it up at that point. The contamination is done.
It would not destroy the admissibility of any usable evidence, just because evidence of the mother was also found.
In fact, that would be normal in many other circumstances.
As the other users have said, it was on purpose. And so was the moment where she touches the comic, even though the others tell her that, if she touches it, it won't be valid evidence anymore.
shareThat was the most REALISTIC scene of that kind, EVER in a movie.
Do you really think that a MOTHER could look at her child like that,
and just remain professional? NO freaking WAY!!!!
She did exactly what ANY mother would have done, and the other agents
would not have been able to do anything about it.
"for God's sake, can't a woman wreak a little havoc without there being a man involved?"
"the other agents would not have been able to do anything about it."
I'm pretty sure this only happens in movies. In real life, the person would be physically held back by a bunch of police as they are trained to not let anybody contaminate the crime scene. To say a group of trained police and feds "would not have been able to do anything about it" as far as restraining one hysterical person is silly.
In movies however, we always need to see the person crying hysterically whilst hugging the body while all the police stand around going "Ah it doesn't matter if they destroy all the evidence".
"Ah it doesn't matter if they destroy all the evidence".Ha! She can't destroy "all" the evidence by hugging the body.
the person would be physically held back by a bunch of policeWhat "bunch" of police? In this case she was behind the police "crowd control/crime scene" protection line because she is a police officer...and the rest of her colleagues were more than grabbing range behind her. Do you think the average colleagues would have foremost in their mind, "oh...she's probably going to freak out and jump in the bin with body. I better get ready to hold her back/down when she cracks."
That's kind of the whole point though. The fact that she disregards/forgets proper procedure is showing us how devastated she is. The fact that none of the others stop her is showing us how devastated they all are. And it's symbolic of the way they're all losing (or going to lose) themselves and their professionalism in the story.
It's a story, not a documentary. Some events are dictated by narrative and symbolism and stuff like that.
Some of you love looking for errors. Her touching the body of her deceased daughter is realistic. It's her daughter and only *beep* child she is dead and not coming back sheer shock would throw all logic out.
Heath Ledger Come Back,
This isn't funny, at all.