Not need.
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Click
al666940 — 11 years ago(April 02, 2015 08:48 PM)
Not need.
Name one single instance where Ames (Hoff) even hinted at career retaliation if he failed to sacrifice family time (he only said "No problem, I'll get xxx on it").
Missing on a opportunity to climb the ladder is NOT the same as having the Sword of Damocles pending over his head regarding getting fired the second he shows up a minute late.
The movie even hints at his real reason when we get to see his past when at camp (the kids preferring to go to the kid's trailer than to his tent): envy and insecurity (his sense of worth depending on peer recognition).
Many workaholics work also out of choice, not need (their drive for recognition/success/wealth is bigger than their need for home time). The movie shows that precisely: Michael puts that much time at work not really out of need, but out of having a huge chip on his shoulder.
I mean what other proof you need but to see his behaviour in auto-pilot when he's a CEO? He was just as busy and distant from his family if not more, so clearly he's neglecting his family not out of need. And being clearly a huge A hole to them, which shows clearly where his heart was. This has a hint of Breaking Bad in my opinion (apparent nice guys who are driven by inner demons to destroy their lives and families while allegedly trying to provide for them) -
novastar_6 — 10 years ago(April 06, 2015 09:29 PM)
Like I've always said, okay, he couldn't afford a few nice things for his family, big difference in that and say, if he didn't do all these assignments they'd be kicked out to the streets. Never once was there any hint made that they were in actual financial trouble, just that he worked all the time figuring SOMEDAY his ship would come in, like Cat's in the Cradle, that SOMEDAY never comes and all you have to look back on is how you missed EVERYTHING because you were working.
-
justanicknamed — 9 years ago(August 02, 2016 09:11 PM)
You don't seem to understand the difference between working to support your family and being a workaholic who loses sight of what is important for his family.
He had a nice, stable life with a marketable skill. If he lost his job with that place, he could easily get hired elsewhere.
Instead of making sacrifices of his own so that his family could benefit, he sacrificed his family. In the end, his wife divorces him, he wasn't there when his father died, he's estranged from his children - but he's in charge of the company when he dies.
As the saying goes, "For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and to lose his soul?"