I don't care how bad things might have looked…
-
andrewpi7 — 9 years ago(July 19, 2016 06:27 PM)
The original post said (s)he would just stay in the car. That's not movie action hero stuff at all. They said they may fight to the end or may do suicide after the car is attacked - they didn't say they knew 100% for sure.
Life is not a movie and we all know what happens to people when they kill their kids only because one day they find themselves stressed or scared. -
Minus_The_Beer — 9 years ago(August 29, 2016 08:23 AM)
Kind of seemed a hopeless situation to me. Then again, I actually paid attention to the movie.
Being killed instantly by a bullet would be preferable to being harvested by giant insects, but hey, what do I know?
Anyone here mentions Hotel California dies before the first line clears his lips. -
zigomanis18 — 9 years ago(August 29, 2016 06:19 PM)
Yeah it was hopeless, but why would you not stop for gas and take a chance rather that let your car run out of gas and know you left yourself with no chance. The book ending ( Alternative ) he says he has about 90 miles left and will look to siphon gas. That actually makes much more sense.
-
Minus_The_Beer — 9 years ago(August 30, 2016 02:57 PM)
The book ending ( Alternative ) he says he has about 90 miles left and will look to siphon gas. That actually makes much more sense.
Sure. But if they had gone with that ending, we wouldn't be talking about it right now. It's just not a terribly compelling stopping point. Fact is, love it or hate it, the ending they chose really helped to define the movie.
Anyone here mentions Hotel California dies before the first line clears his lips. -
zigomanis18 — 9 years ago(August 30, 2016 03:07 PM)
I gotta give you that. It does define the flick. Cannot argue that.
But for me, I still would have liked the flick as much with the book ending..which to me is FAR more gloomy. Yeah, the 4 characters are dead, but otherwise it's a happy ending. The mist is gone and humanity has won. TEH book ending is FAR more hopeless and creepy overall. -
debunkerboy — 9 years ago(August 30, 2016 03:38 PM)
Without the ending the movie would be unremarkable. As it is the film will be talked about for a very long time. But that doesn't make it right. There are good and bad ways to attain notoriety. Ryan Lochte for example.
-
zigomanis18 — 9 years ago(August 30, 2016 04:15 PM)
I actually disagree. The ending makes people talk..but the movie was great either way. I cant think that the last 5 minutes of the movie was THE sole reason for the popularity. I disagree. We will never know of coursebut I think this movie with the book ending ( Which can be seen as the alternative ending on youtube ) is just as strong.
-
-
andrewpi7 — 9 years ago(September 04, 2016 09:30 PM)
I think most people would think a child saying that is simply a child just saying they are scared and asking for their parent to protect them. I doubt any child that age has a "read between the lines" hidden message of assisted suicide in it.
Even if the child specifically asked for assisted suicide before letting the monsters get him, which he didn't, and the dad wanted to make sure the monsters wouldn't get him "no matter what" then the dad should have killed the boy in the store. It wouldn't make any sense taking the boy into the parking lot's mist where the dad knew countless monsters have killed several adults and that there was no guarantee even the dad would make it to the vehicle, much less a child. -
treetherealest — 9 years ago(September 05, 2016 09:57 AM)
Well, it doesn't matter what the child meant, it meant how the father interpreted it. You have a point of how them going outside to escape put the child in the way of harm. However, he was doing that in what he viewed as a last means to escape. Once the car ran out of gas, he pretty much thought that was the end, as they had no more of a game plan after that.
-
andrewpi7 — 9 years ago(September 05, 2016 12:09 PM)
No sane father would warp 1 sentence so far into an invitation for assisted suicide from a mere child & nothing in the film suggested the father had a problem with morbid/extreme misinterpretations or that the kid was suicidal. Throughout the film, the dad risked his life & others (including his son) in far more dangerous situations than when the car ran out of gas. The dad made risky game plans throughout the film, yet now (despite their very long quiet drive) he suddenly makes no game plan for gas or another vehicle or anything? I get what you're saying, it's just completely inconsistent/contradictory with what the film showed earlier of all 4 adults (especially the dad) which makes it look so fake. If only the dad was in the car with the boy it's easier to believe that the dad just suddenly snapped & went crazy, but it's not believable that the other 3 adults would also have the exact same feelings about mass suicide & child murder.
-
Revler — 9 years ago(December 19, 2016 09:48 AM)
Actually shooting the kid might make sense. No parent wants to see their kid scared to death and ripped apart but some who knows what. However, why not wait until there is at least some threat? I guess she was worried an attack might knock the gun out of his hand or something but I agree about shooting the town people. Anybody recognize 4 people from the walking dead? Andrea, Dale, Carol and the Creator/Producer (Frank Darabont) for season 1-2. He was fired from the number one cable show. the rumor is that it was cheaper to bring in someone cheaper after he established the tone and characters of the show. I also believe he sued for his future pay because firing him to save money was against the Union rule Pretty crappy if its true.. Jeffery DeMunn (Dale) a friend of Darabont and quit TWD in protest.
Anyway, its cool to see that many pre-walking dead crew on one show.