1.) That these 4 homosexual/bisexual pedophiles would end up all working at the same institution, and conveniently work
-
kathyk-2 — 15 years ago(September 17, 2010 11:10 AM)
1.) That these 4 homosexual/bisexual pedophiles would end up all working at the same institution, and conveniently work the same shift? (Ritual child abusers, despite how often they appear in the news, are not really that common when you consider the entire population. Plus, there are fewer homosexuals/bisexuals than straights in general, so that makes it even more of a stretch.)
They didn't have to be complete psychopaths or degenerates, it could be a combination of being at the wrong place/time and having a weak, follower personality. The three followers probably would have been fine with a different supervisor. The drinking just helped them to ease into the situation.
2.) That you could count on one of them to immediately crack under pressure on the stand, and confess everything? (The movie keeps telling us how "brilliant" Brad Pitt's master plan is, but it seems to be built on a lot of luck.)
A combination of luck and planning. The fact that Fergusen was now more of a devout Christian, teaching sunday school or whatever, made him more vulnerable to guilt/remorse of his previous actions. He had made a change for the better - unlike Nokes who just scoffed when faced with being confronted by his 2 victims.
3.) That 2 experienced criminals/killers wouldn't wait outside a restaurant for their prey to leave, and kill him thererather than open fire inside a restaurant where people know them?
I don't know, I mean waiting outside would make sense to me, but these guys had slid into deviant behavior, or perhaps it was somewhat a crime of passion, seeing your tormentor all of a sudden, enjoying a casual dinner in the same resaurant they may have considered their 'turf'. -
Lilsy — 15 years ago(September 19, 2010 01:35 PM)
- Sexual crimes are influenced less by any sexual attraction towards the victim, and more on the thrill one can get from being in power, in totally control. Many priests found to be abusing young boys identify as straight men; they simply had most access to boys, so they abused boys. If they were around some girls, they would abuse them, too, because the gender didn't matter as long as it was someone weaker then them i.e. a child.
2)The guard they picked to go on the witness stand was now an upstanding citizen and if teaching Sunday school was anything to go by, a man of God. Plus, he probably wasn't expecting that anyone was going to ask about what went on at the detention center. Put together his new found morality and the element of surprise and you got someone more than likely to crack under pressure.
3)Probably the heat of moment got to them. The mere presence of the guy that tormented them so horribly made all sense go out the window.
The Player: We're actors! We're the opposite of people!
Hey
, brother~ Buster, AD
- Sexual crimes are influenced less by any sexual attraction towards the victim, and more on the thrill one can get from being in power, in totally control. Many priests found to be abusing young boys identify as straight men; they simply had most access to boys, so they abused boys. If they were around some girls, they would abuse them, too, because the gender didn't matter as long as it was someone weaker then them i.e. a child.
-
dab6 — 14 years ago(October 31, 2011 03:30 PM)
- Has been well explained by replies. Though the question remains why he didn't suspect why Nokes was murdered, and then piece together what was going on from there.
- Yeah, I think you're supposed to assume that they were just overwhelmed by the post-trauma of seeing him again. Plus, their casual attitude of walking out and saying "One down" to Shakes suggests that they were confident they had impunity given their connections.
-
zusje1984 — 14 years ago(November 13, 2011 04:42 PM)
- Like previous posters said,it wasn't really about the sex(most of them were married,I believe even Noakes was wearing a ring in that first shot of him we see him in).It was purely about the power over the boys,it probably wasn't even about the sex but "teaching the boys a lesson" as Nokes said many times.Making them respect and fear them and what better way to control a bunch of kids than to break their spirits,and again what better,easier and faster way to do that than to completely and utterly hummiliate them and use them like that.
2)I don't think they were counting on him to break down at the stand like that,that was an added bonus(esp. since it didn't nor would help their case in any way,if anything if it came out that John and Tommy were in Wilkenson at the same time as Nokes it would automatically give them a motive for killing him and it would hurt them,so it was risky business to say the least).They were trying to "open the door" to the horrors that happenned over there,making the accussations and letting the public know that something fishy was going down there so that it would hopefully lead to people checking things out.They chose Ferguson because he seemed "squeeky clean" and he was working in social services(thus making it more likely for people to start looking into it a bit more).Of course Ferguson almost immediatelly when the questions started about the tortures etc recognised the two boys.That confrontation alone,along with the fact he himself was a father by then,he was a man of God and the years of guilt he probably had felt since "escaping" Nokes' control led to the breakdown,but you could clearly see(and it was brilliantly acted by all actors I must add) how surprised and ecstatic they were when he said that "yes" and admitted to everythingyou could clearly see they were all struggling not to start shouting out of pure joy!
3)Again like other posters said,it wasn't about making a hit,it wasn't even the reason why they went there in the first place.They saw the man that had hurt them after years,and John was clearly upset even after all those years.It wasn't them tracking him down and planning how to kill him,it was them being at the same place with the bastard for the first time in all those years and for the first time they had the upper hand.They didn't think things through,they just wanted revenge and they took it!
- Like previous posters said,it wasn't really about the sex(most of them were married,I believe even Noakes was wearing a ring in that first shot of him we see him in).It was purely about the power over the boys,it probably wasn't even about the sex but "teaching the boys a lesson" as Nokes said many times.Making them respect and fear them and what better way to control a bunch of kids than to break their spirits,and again what better,easier and faster way to do that than to completely and utterly hummiliate them and use them like that.
-
PointXBlankXRange — 14 years ago(November 25, 2011 06:13 PM)
Since everyone has already given the answer I would have said for 1 and 3, I just wanted to add on to what some people were saying about the second one. In the book, Carcaterra made a pretty huge point of saying that Ferguson was the weakest of the bunch and mostly preyed on John (who was the weakest of the group), because he could be easily overpowered. While Ferguson may have grown up to be an upstanding citizen, he was still a weak man, and could be overpowered by others. Enough bullying on the stand, and he would have caved in, it's that simple.
-
ashleynwaldron — 14 years ago(March 11, 2012 10:49 PM)
It wasn't about 'homosexual/bisexual'. To a degree, it wasn't even about pedophilia.
If you read the book, Noakes and I believe it was Addison had problems with women, and severe power issues. It was about fear. They feed off the fear of the four young boys, because it was the only time in their lives that they were SOMEBODY. They held the power over these four boys. The other two men (including the one on the stand) basically just followed along. Much like many of the Nazis, these men didn't necessarily like what was going on, or even agree with it, but they went along with it, because they were weak-willed, easily lead men.
As for the third part of your question If you listen as Shakes narrates, he tells us how both Johnny and Tommy have serious cocaine addictions. Not to mention seeing their childhood abuser, knowing that they held the power for the first time It's a heady experience. Add that to a long-term cocaine addiction, and yeah, I'd say it's plausible. I'm not saying I believe the story is true, but not for those reasons. -
LaneMarie88 — 13 years ago(June 02, 2012 01:30 AM)
Good points. I believe this whole story is pure fiction.
http://articles.nydailynews.com/1996-11-03/entertainment/18010076_1_lo renzo-carcaterra-reform-school-hell-s-kitchen
A Marine's Daughter
)) -::-
. .))
((. . -::-
-:: -
orangewarm — 13 years ago(December 16, 2012 07:32 PM)
Well OP, I have a theory on your first point. It seems that pedophiles are attracted to positions/jobs of this kind vulnerable children/ children not likely to be believed. Of course, some abusers are worse than others but the weak ones tend to follow the strong ones. Its a similar situation to the Abu Graib prison incidents in Iraq. Power corrupts. I believe a scientist showed this also - forget his name. Even if you started out as a decent person, a level of authority over someone can corrupt you.
As this movie comes from a novel, I agree with you on the final two points. They are just plot points to make the story interesting/believable. -
latinraiders781 — 10 years ago(February 10, 2016 02:00 PM)
They were doing it for years these weren't their first victims. You have to rememberthey aren't the only guards abusing boys. The odds of 4 child molesters is possible. Think about how many guards work in a big facility that held hundreds maybe thousands of boys per shift. When several cops in real life shoved a plunger up Louimaa's ass it wasn't meant as a sexual act it was to torture him.
-
Noirdame79 — 9 years ago(June 15, 2016 07:31 PM)
People need to stop throwing in the word "gay" with pedophile. The one has nothing to do with the other. Are men who molest young girls referred to as "straight pedophiles"? Of course not. There is a simple reason why some predators target boys specifically (and there are some who will victimize children of both genders) - boys are less likely to tell, and less likely to be believed. And of course, Nokes and the other guards felt the need to dominate the boys because they couldn't fight back. In the book, Shakes notes that their power only existed within the walls at Wilkinson. Had they been in Hell's Kitchen or anywhere out in the world they would have no power whatsoever and would just be simpering cowards. He also says that each guard chose one boy specifically as their "pet" or target. Nokes abused all of them but he chose Michael to abuse most of all because Michael was his group leader, as Nokes was. Fergueson reserved his rage for John (in the book, it is revealed that John was frail due to being born with a hole in his heart) because Fergueson had been weak and sickly as a kid also and saw himself in John. Styler selected Tommy to mistreat because he also came from a poor family. Addison saw himself in Shakes and for that reason used him as a physical and verbal punching bag.