I mean she asked Kevin where is his family and he answered. She should have stopped there. Asking him where he lives was
-
fiatlux-1 — 11 years ago(March 25, 2015 03:47 PM)
I agree, she was half-playing with him half-trying to get information.
As to why she believed him, remember this was 1990. Things were a little different then, the world was less of a nanny-state as it is now.
Second, Kevin was pretty convincing in his explanation. He didn't seem unsure of himself or scared in any way. He also gave crisp & clear answers to her questions.
3. This was likely an upscale neighborhood, another reason some people tend to 'assume the best'.
I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus.
Didn't he discover America?
Penfold, shush. -
mikeyg24 — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 10:24 AM)
Yes safer crime wise but he's still a kid. What's to stop him getting hit by a car in the parking lot? Who do they call if he slips and falls in the store? Where is his mom parked? He doesn't have a drivers license so how do they know who he is?
I've had a lot of sobering thoughts in my time Del Boy, it's them that started me drinking! -
helkaermala — 10 years ago(December 22, 2015 04:11 PM)
An eight-year-old should know how to walk around the neighborhood without supervision. By that time his parents should have taught him how to watch out for cars ages ago. Seriously, he goes to school but he can't go grocery-shopping? I don't know how much of a nanny-state USA is but to me this seems excessive. Their neighborhood seemed calm and secure, the kid was cool as a cucumber and did not seem lost at all, so seriously, what's the big deal? Of course it's good to ask where his parents are, but I see no reason to doubt his explanation when it's given as fast and as confidently as Kevin did in the movie.
-
Carlos_Nikos — 10 years ago(November 30, 2015 06:07 AM)
I reckon the most plausible explanation is that she moonlights as a 'groomer' for a massive child smuggling/ pedophile ring in Illinois. I think she saw an opportunity to get paid for passing on some vital information and Kevin was her target.
-
EightiesKid — 9 years ago(April 04, 2016 01:31 PM)
Coming from a different angle, I wonder if Kevin buying a cartful of stuff could've been what set off her suspicion more than him being alone? Like if he was just getting 1 or 2 things, I'm sure she wouldn't have batted an eye at him saying "My mom's in the car."
It was a supermarket in an upscale neighborhood in 1989/1990, so it probably wasn't as unusual at the time. I'm Kevin's age, and I didn't regularly start grocery shopping on my own until like 1995 at 12-13, but if I had five years earlier just using real world logic, I'm sure somebody would've definitely said something. -
!!!deleted!!! (14209231) — 9 years ago(September 26, 2016 01:48 AM)
Oh for goodness sake! It's only a movie. Why do people take these kinda things so seriously all the time?! Enough analyzing and more enjoying. This film is a great holiday film, and so is the second one. ?
-
stevenackerman69 — 9 years ago(October 01, 2016 07:59 PM)
Just because Kevin gave an answer to it doesn't mean it was the truth. It wasn't, right? I think I'd be a little suspicious myself seeing an 8 year old kid buying stuff at the supermarket himself. Kids don't do that.
-
Blizzard_Beasts — 9 years ago(December 03, 2016 09:32 AM)
What about the fact that she held up the army men toys and Kevin said "For the kids," then later on she asked "Where's your brothers and sisters?" and Kevin said "I'm an only child."
So what "kids" were those army men toys for? lol -
Utpe — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 07:34 PM)
So what "kids" were those army men toys for? lol
Oh, I'm sure Kevin was simply implying that the "kids" were merely disadvantaged children that receive presents around the holidays via donation. It is plausible.
Though, I do want to give my input on the original topic: Kevin was a kid in an upscale neighborhood. Even though there is Tort Law, she had every right to ask, even if it seemed a bit intrusive. Back then, nobody thought about children being sold into slavery. More than likely, they were concerned about Kevin falling and breaking his neck on company property.
When I was 10 years old, I walked down the street to the local supermarket and bought a bag of popcorn and some candy with my allowance. The cashier never grilled me about any information concerning my relatives. I simply purchased it, walked out, and went home. This was in the early '90s, as well.
Nowadays, in a Big Brother society, it's easier to track your children with smartphones and the like.
BTW, I went ahead and viewed the original trailer. They should have kept the scene with the manager of the establishment asking Kevin the questions. It just makes more sense.