Films/DVD Asylum

Re: review of 'unfaithful'

64.230.13.142

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ] [ FAQ ]

In Reply to: Re: review of 'unfaithful' posted by rufus on December 26, 2002 at 19:54:48:

I quite liked this film. What I found strange are all the reviews that said they "couldn't understand what motivation she had for an affair." When I went the audience was 3/4 women -- does that answer the question?
Doug Schneider

Follow Ups:

senselessness as a vehicle to tax the emotions - njjohn 12:16:12 12/27/02 (2)
i was trying to give every benefit of the doubt why this woman wanted this affair. what hidden part of her needed to find expression?
and to be realistic too, even though it's senseless, it's not that all improbable or implausible. women's nature can be like that. i've seen it.
but i think the director was careful not to give any real motivation other than something hidden, something feminine perhaps.
and the effect of something a bit without sense or meaning was the vehicle to work up the emotional strain in me. very, very clever control of emotion in the audience through the apparent senselessness of the whole thing.
and of course this, the emotional pain of it all, serves as a springboard for the rest of the movie's development.
this is a well-controlled, clever and subtle film. the very fact that there is really nothing to hang the whole affair on, was intentional, and the genius and drive of the whole film.
are critics really that dumb???
- Re: senselessness as a vehicle to tax the emotions - Doug Schneider 15:04:48 12/27/02 (1)
  I think that if you talk to many women, the reason WAS obvious. The problem is, most critics are men and they can't see it.
  Doug Schneider
  - :) :) - njjohn 20:16:41 12/27/02 (0)
    that is funny. i guess i saw it through the husband's eyes. the lover did not appeal to me. i didn't see any value in him or in the affair.
    he was a bit phony to me, and obviously she didn't want to see it. i found no poignancy in him. that braille junk wouldn't have sold me if i was a woman. that hard banging, whoopie doo. it was very obvious that he had one intention. maybe he is a woman's type. maybe women are gullible too. :)
    maybe that was part of the intention. someone sort of appealing, but really not, made it seem all the more senseless.
    are women and men really that vulnerable to someone with 'looks'?
    the husband was the more substantive of the two men. but he wasn't perfect either. seems to blank out a bit, but recover with some sensibilities. he was a little tiring, but not enough to be stupid over someone else.
    the woman had her little journey, her intoxication. but it was no small journey. it went beyond, and then the whole thing went beyond.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Sonic Craft

You can not post to an archived thread.