Wasn't his son such a pansy?
-
lysander-6 — 17 years ago(August 06, 2008 07:42 PM)
I had similar thoughts. Any son of Connery would be eating steaks and assembling guns blindfolded by the time he was six. His "son" in this movie was such a loser, it broke the fourth wall. Easily the least realistic element of this film. (He was also a crap actor.)
although, here's a thought: if his offspring was that much of a disappointment, it might explain why he took a job several thousand miles from his family. I mean, there's even that Freudian slip moment where O'Neil says "you're going to be missing some teeth if you don't finish your breakfast." I think that was O'Neil fantasizing about giving his lame kid a taste of his backhand.
Oh, and the DVD of this movie is worse than VHS. It deserves better. -
Hythlodaeus — 15 years ago(December 14, 2010 03:09 PM)
Yeah, I think we all noticed how lame the son seemed but I assumed that it was supposed to show what a good father Connery's character was.
For example with my own sons (I have three) I am a pretty gentle father but also I am harsh with my kids at various times which isn't good - if I was consistently a strong father I would be gentle with my kids all the time. The men I've known who are tough are often very tender to their sons/kids. A man who is weak himself will sometimes be very harsh with his sons producing sons who are harsh as well but not strong.
Think about it, the bad-boy types are usually the ones who knock their wife and kids around - themselves are cowards unless no ones around. We often confuse the bad-boy types with the strong soldier types who Connery was supposed to be.
The point with the son was supposed to be that his son was someone worth protecting, like the mother and that the right thing for Connery to do is to bring his family home to earth to have some joy in their hertofore bleak lives. -
DurakSuka — 12 years ago(April 13, 2013 10:57 AM)
Agreed. That doctor who helped him out even at the risk of her own life was a real woman. That pathetic emotionally disturbed whore of a wife wasn't worth the piss of that doctor. Connery should have just dumped that beep and taken the son, and beep off from there with a hot babe!
Hama cheez ba-Beer behtar meshawad! -
onepotato2 — 17 years ago(March 01, 2009 12:05 PM)
Half the problem is that the child actor is actually "Acting." Trying to look earnest, he instead becomes an 9 year old acting like a 4 year old.
It doesn't help that the kid refers to his mother as "Mommy." That always grosses me out in anyone over six. I have adult friends in their 40s who still call their mother "Mommy."
Just gross.
On the other hand, 9 year old boys don't have hairy chests, bed women and
act manly. It's called adolescence. Your standard is wrong. -
scotbpens — 16 years ago(December 05, 2009 11:01 PM)
On the other hand, 9 year old boys don't have hairy chests, bed women and act manly.
Maybe not yet, but they're starting puberty earlier and earlier these days!
All the universe . . . or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be? -
-
dchipman — 9 years ago(December 17, 2016 10:11 PM)
DING!-DING!-DING! We have a winner!
This is exactly what I thought. Why shouldn't Sean Connery's character have a kid like that? He's not James Bond, in this movie.
Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop -
katesgram2000 — 16 years ago(May 24, 2009 02:26 PM)
As he was talking to his dad and calling him Daddy and referring to his mom as Mommy I turned to my husband and said "That kid is way too old to be calling his parents Mommy and Daddy". It just sounded so stupid- they either needed to change his dialog or get a younger actor.
-
jhbt0805 — 16 years ago(August 02, 2009 01:13 AM)
It truly was surreal seeing the kid calling O'Niel and wife Mommy and Daddy when he looked about 10 or 11. But wasn't the kid's voice dubbed? Looking at the cast page and clicking on his name, it appears the kid was a British actor like the wife. A dub might explain the terrible delivery. I don't know why they decided to hire three British/Irish people for the family and then give the boy an American accent.
-
saint665 — 16 years ago(August 12, 2009 02:43 PM)
Y'know, I showed this film to a friend of mine a short while ago (first time I'd seen it in years) and the same thought struck me. Every time he called O'Neill "Daddy" I just wanted to slap him.
Anyone think the kid's "pansiness" is Exhibit A that the wife was cheating on O'Neill while he was out of duty?
"An old lady on Main Street last night picked up a shoe. The shoe had a foot in it. We're gonna make you pay for that mess." - Hank Quinlan -
rooprect — 16 years ago(December 28, 2009 09:10 AM)
I thought they purposely made the kid a pansy. A few years ago I saw a Discovery Channel show about how children would be if they were born & raised in space.
For one thing, the low gravity would hinder their bone development, so they would beliterallysoft.
Also, the hyper-sterile, closed environment would basically turn them into bubble boys. No immunities, no resistance to the simplest of germs.
And of course the lack of gravity would also stunt their muscular development, and they'd be puny 98 lb weaklings.
The show didn't project what their brains/personalities would be like, but we can assume the lack of sensory input & freedom would make them dimwitted & fearful creatures.
Add the fact that his father is never home, and he's raised exclusively by his mother for 10 years.
Duh, of course he's going to be a momma's boy. The filmmakers did a great job of portraying this (even though the exploding bodies may have been a lil over the topbut we'll let that pass because it looked really friggin cool).