What was Arthur's Hamilton's problem?
-
littlekaren — 18 years ago(March 17, 2008 11:12 AM)
Heard a sermon once that nobody has it all. So, Arthur seemingly had it all, possibly before, and after, the transformation. But did he? It's a question I ask myself. Some are, maybe, born always wanting more.
-
paulovmota — 15 years ago(October 26, 2010 12:29 PM)
I also believe most you of guys missed the point.
He wasn't gay! His relation with Charlie was simple. They were buddies and Charlie saw in him the perfect guy to report to the company - Like they say in the end, they can't really put their number on a local news paper.
The point was that Arthur had lived what society advised - "Go To Harvard!", "Get Married" etc.
This is an empty life because he forced themthis wasn't really him! (or any of us for that matter).
He felt he didn't had a choice. This feeling came back on his "2nd life" because the company was doing the same things society had done to him in his 1st life.
Then he got back to his wife and saw how the company (in the beg) was right! That life mean't nothing! The only thing in that house that was accomplished by him was that "Fidelis Eternis" award.
He went back to the company to re-arrange with them what he thought was going to be his perfect new beg. He was right "I just want to make my own choices" like he had done in the past, but now he would probably do more accurate choices.
That's the problem with life! Turning back is an illusion!(that's what the end met).
This point of seeing Arthur as a gay individual is pointless people see what they want to see and that is ok but please don't forget the point of the movie
and btw people who say that the nude scenes were a bit off I totally disagree the line that Nora says about letting it go and that the wine is the blood of society (or something like that) is essential to the release of Arthur into Tony. the letting go.
Who know nudity can be a symbol of FREEDOM. isn't just the chance to see nice chicks naked for your own amusement
"Cut with the night into mine heart" - Wrest -
Owlwise — 15 years ago(February 09, 2011 11:50 AM)
This is it exactly!
Those arguing for a gay subtext are completely missing the point. While a terrific film could have been made about that and it would have been fascinating to see! this is NOT that film.
This is a film about midlife, especially midlife in American consumerist society. Arthur had followed all the rules & won all the prizes he'd been taught to value and yet, none of that was satisfying in the end. Because somewhere along the way, in pursuing all that he'd been taught to pursue, he lost himself. As he admits near the end, he never had a dream. And if he ever did, it was lost & forgotten long ago. His life was empty of meaning, and all the money & reputation & women & success in the world couldn't fill up that gaping black hole in his soul.
Meaning .. that's what he was really looking for & hoping to find in his second life. But even then, he didn't realize until too late what is was he wanted & needed. Perhaps his only authentic moments as a human being were when he was being wheeled down the corridor to his death, and he screamed in anguish & loss, understanding in one blinding flash what he could have & should have done with his life, and how he'd let it slip through his fingers. -
franzkabuki — 14 years ago(April 26, 2011 03:09 AM)
Even if the protagonist were gay - to which theres next to no evidence whatsoever, mind you - itd still be but a minor element in his identity/post-midlife crisis.
And jesus, is this one bleak film. Perhaps even out does The Pawnbroker in these regards. Some real disturbing darkness was injected into Hollywood moviemaking in the early-to-mid 1960s.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan -
ptuk-1 — 9 years ago(February 07, 2017 12:32 AM)
His biggest mistake was trusting the company and returning to them, he could have planned an escape and done a runner and started a new life on his own, the reason he was unhappy was because everything was given to him on a plate so there's no challenge left, it happens to lottery winners as well after the shock of having unlimited income is over life becomes depressing because everything comes too easy, if he had only taken more time and contemplated his options the film might have had a happier ending.
-
Woodyanders — 7 years ago(July 19, 2018 12:01 AM)
Hamilton's problem was that although he had a deep-seated need to change his life, he alas didn't really know what exactly he wanted from life that would in turn make him happy.
You've seen Guy Standeven in something because the man was in everything.
