MovieChat Forums > Taffybird > Replies
Taffybird's Replies
God yes. This movie romanticised gender fetishism to breaking point, pushing the idea that trans-widows should continue to love and support their spouse by changing their own identity (and possibly sexuality) to find true happiness.
Loathed it. What an offensive and degrading message.
It was a devastating ending. After getting so close to escaping once already, to refuse to leave at the last moment made no sense. Until I thought about it afterwards, of course. She did the only thing she could do - she saw her baby safe in the care of her friend, and stayed to rescue her other child. If she’d left Gilead she wouldn’t have been able to help her. Nobody on the outside can influence anything - she’d have no chance. She knows what she’s giving up, and she knows the risk she’s taking. But she sees it as a better option than living half a life, without ever seeing her child again, always wondering if she could have helped her.
It’s been a while since I read the books but I’m pretty sure his exile to Ardsmuir prison was the result of a scandal concerning his sexuality. He was sent away in disgrace to try and hush it up.
I pictured him as older and uglier when I read the book. But I’m glad to see a thoroughly loathsome villain again. After Randall’s demise I thought the series suffered for the lack of a proper baddie. The vaguely menacing reappearance of Geillis and the feeling that she was up to no good was just not the same.
I wondered that too. I think the first time it was a member of the cult checking up on their prodigy. A sort of Paimon groupie - hanging around school to try and catch a glimpse.
The second time it was Joan wasn’t it? I don’t know why she was shouting at him but by that time the cult were trying to use Peter as the new host. Maybe “get out” meant literally that. “Get out of that body so that Paimon can occupy it.” Doesn’t make much sense though when they have all kinds of rituals and magic to bring that about. What good would shouting at him do?
One example would be the Magdalene asylums in Ireland. They operated until the late 20th century, forcibly separating unmarried mothers from their children. The babies were adopted and the mothers locked up in servitude as a punishment for their “immorality.”
I don't think Jamie and Black Jack were actually the last men standing. It just seemed that way to them when they found themselves facing each other. The scenery went a bit blurry and other-worldly at that point which was meant to suggest everything else ceased to exist for them at that moment.
It is a shame that our history has to be dumbed down and beautified to make it saleable. The real Victoria had many admirable qualities but beauty wasn't top of the list. I would have liked to see an unknown in the role too, or at least someone who is known more for her talent than her looks.
Bryony Hannah, perhaps?
The dragons believe it. That may be all he needs.
Ah - of course. The magistrate job. Yes, you're right. He could have kept George out of that post if he'd wanted to.
It just goes to show that being a man of principle does not mean you're always right.
When he turned it down, I don't think he realised that George would be next in line. If he had known, I wonder if he would have agreed to stand, just to stop George from doing so?
He lives by his principles, and he didn't believe that he was the right man for the job. Would his moral compass have allowed him to take a position he didn't want and didn't think he was up to, just to stop someone who would be undoubtedly worse?
We'll never know. But it is darned frustrating to see George strutting it up now he's an MP.
Indeed. I actually really enjoyed the movie. Those two gripes were just minor annoyances.
It was also in the trailer for "Cloud Atlas". I always did love it.
I think the opening sequence is right up there with Game Of Thrones and The Crown for atmosphere and majesty.
Also, it may be that the wives are not barren at all. Just stuck with sterile husbands and way too pious and obedient to look for pregnancy opportunities elsewhere.
I think Serena was smart enough to know this. I think a lot of her simmering resentment and frustration came from suspectimg that she may actually be fertile, but because of the messed-up world that she helped to create, she will never know.
Ha! Funny that. While I was watching it I remember thinking "Red Dwarf did all this *years* ago..." (Right down to the malfunctioning skutters.)
I didn't mind the ending. I was just glad they didn't have kids. If it was inhumane to wake someone up for company it would have been a moral shitstorm to produce a child who would end up alone.
I think I liked it better than 1/10, but I agree with many of your criticisms. I'm a huge HP fan, but the reason I love it is that it has a phenomenal story to get absorbed in. I wondered how a small reference book would make an entertaining film and sure enough, it was very light on plot and character development.
I did enjoy spotting the creatures that I'd heard of but there was such an enormously irritating plot-hole it rather spoilt it for me. If Scamander was the rescuer and temporary custodian of a colossal, magical thunderbird...wouldn't he have thought to mention it in his book? Maybe there'll be an explanation for this glaring omission in future films.
It definitely relied heavily on arresting visuals, and the lack of interesting story had me almost nodding off twice. Also...and I hate to say this because I normally love Eddie Redmayne...I thought there were some very odd choices of actor for the lead roles. Dan Fogler's was the only performance I'd consider even slightly memorable.