the baby on the beach…….really disturbing.
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Under the Skin
jjett123 — 11 years ago(June 24, 2014 12:42 PM)
this scene was so haunting and disturbing. first the parents & dog drown then the poor little baby girl is just there on the beach (when it's still daytime). we eventually see (it's nighttime now) the baby still there crying and terrified all alone. we hear a bit later on the radio in Scarlett's character's car that the entire family (including baby) are missing. such a disturbing scene.
-
Dejay — 11 years ago(June 24, 2014 04:20 PM)
Especially when it tried to get up. But at the same time it showed the frailty of the human race. Animals have instincts and know what to do, as babies all we can do is cry and whine. And even as we get older, all we can do is cry and whine on the imdb board. Just kidding!
But seriously, it was a powerful scene. Going from such a beautiful landscape and everyday scene suddenly to a dramatic event with first the women after the dog in the water and then the man. And it was so stupid! What a great idiocy to run fully clothed into the water after a dog. And then again running into the water after just being rescued! Kind of like evolution at work, or shows how disconnected humans are with the dangers of nature. -
jjett123 — 11 years ago(June 24, 2014 05:42 PM)
Dejay,
"And even as we get older, all we can do is cry and whine on the imdb board. Just kidding!"
RIGHT?! lol.
but yeah, i agree w/ you that what the little baby's parents did was extremely stupid. i would die for my animal but NOT if i had a child who is 100% reliant on me! just the fact the baby was there all alone and so vulnerable just horrifies me. -
dreamstate123 — 11 years ago(June 25, 2014 12:44 AM)
There are people out there who would jump into flames for their pets. People don't think sometimes when faced with life or death situations. They just act on instinct. It didn't surprise me that she did. It didn't surprise me that her husband jumped in to get his wife. The child although completely alone was not at walking age obviously and would be fine alone for the time It took for the husband to save his wife. Love and attachment makes us do silly things.
-
Scar38 — 11 years ago(July 15, 2014 04:15 PM)
I'm just watching this movie now and I just saw this part and i am appalled. to show what they showed with the baby scene was disgusting and totally uncalled for. I hate this film and i will never watch it again as long as I live and the writer/director should get a good punch in the face. Sick cretin.
-
groovymike_16 — 11 years ago(July 20, 2014 02:46 AM)
Get over it. I just watched the film and this scene disturbed the hell out of me but why can't a film show something that could absolutely occur? Disturbing stuff happens every day. Was I hoping we'd later hear on the radio that the baby had been found by someone and brought to police custody? Absolutely. It would have eased my mind. But I suppose it's realistic that we didn't. It would have sugar-coated it and made it all better, stripping the scene of its power. The film will haunt me and not just for this scene. Overall I thought this film was a masterpiece. I'm sorry if you're going to let one confrontational scene ruin an entire movie for you.
VERONICA MARS MOVIE - https://www.facebook.com/TheVeronicaMarsMovie?fref=ts -
jpm_831 — 11 years ago(July 29, 2014 11:58 AM)
Shut up, idiot. No one cares. Why do people like you feel that you have a right to not be offended by something? Like you're entitled to have a perfect day or something.You know, how dare they? How dare they make you go, "ugh, that's hard. That's ugly." Jesus Christ. Is it to make yourself feel good, or morally superior over people who understand what a movie is? God I'm so sick of beep whiney pansies like you.
-
LeonardPine — 10 years ago(February 08, 2016 06:24 AM)
"I'm just watching this movie now and I just saw this part and i am appalled. to show what they showed with the baby scene was disgusting and totally uncalled for. I hate this film and i will never watch it again as long as I live and the writer/director should get a good punch in the face. Sick cretin"
It's only a film. It didn't actually happen.
Was it a millionaire who said "Imagine no possessions"? -
tricklebrook — 11 years ago(July 27, 2014 06:22 PM)
@Dejay
And even as we get older, all we can do is cry and whine on the imdb board. Just kidding!
This is totally off-topic but I just had to expression appreciation for your humor. This gave me a big laugh! -
YuunofYork — 9 years ago(November 11, 2016 11:54 AM)
And it was so stupid! What a great idiocy to run fully clothed into the water after a dog. And then again running into the water after just being rescued! Kind of like evolution at work, or shows how disconnected humans are with the dangers of nature.
It was stupid, but it wasn't evolution - or, what I believe you meant to say, natural selection - at work. Empathy, rather than self-preservation, is what humans evolved that made them so successful.
The idea of stupidity as an inherited trait is the single biggest misconception about evolution that intelligent people make. There is simply no such gene for it. Intelligence, of which reasoning power is only a small part, is an emergent property of many different genes and traits, in many viable configurations. What's more, the vast majority of traits we ascribe to intelligence are not innate at all, but learned. Most stupid people had the capacity to learn these traits, at least as children, but never exercised them, and there are usually environmental factors why. The reality is biologically-speaking, there is far less variation between people of high or low intelligence than some people may be comfortable with.
If you somehow had an agreed-upon rubric for measuring intelligence, and were able to separate populations based on certain cut-offs, and let them go for a few decades, no matter which section you looked at would look identical to a cross-section of the total within two generations, for sure.
Didn't mean to get off topic, just pointing this out. -
Dejay — 9 years ago(November 11, 2016 02:10 PM)
Yeah of course, natural selection!
I'm not sure. Do you have scientific knowledge about this? Or a source? Really curious about this. It's hard to differentiate from other factors, but I would think genes do play a big role in intelligence. And yeah there are lots of different kinds of intelligence.
The other big part is interest and energy. If you are interested in something and have the energy to learn, you become good in a field.
Thinking back on the scene, I do think it shows the "stupidity" of some of our human traits. To put it a bit over the top: The scene wasn't about empathy, but about weakness. Both parents were abominable, disgusting creatures. They let their own baby die because they acted like animals instead of rational human beings. Your intentions can be as nice as you want, as long as you are too stupid or too weak or ruled by emotions, your actions are likely to have an evil outcome.
That is what the alien lady would most likely see with her uncaring eyes. It's been a while since I watched the movie but when I rewatch it I'll have to look out for that perspective. -
YuunofYork — 9 years ago(November 11, 2016 03:16 PM)
The NIH library page for intelligence studies has a mostly accurate summary (beware anything labeled 'twin studies'), and a short list of sources:
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/traits/intelligence
Two good introductions are available in full text here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270739/
And here:
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(13)00844-0
Regarding the parents in the film, I would say it is ultimately incidental that they each failed to judge the strength of the current and the risks and consequences of their death, or that they put the life of their dog before their own, or their child's. That is, whether it was out of empathy or out of weakness shouldn't matter. The point of the scene was the alien's attempt at understanding their motivations, which were completely irrational, but also completely human. -
Dejay — 9 years ago(November 12, 2016 01:26 AM)
Thank you! I'll check this out later.
The point of the scene was the alien's attempt at understanding their motivations, which were completely irrational, but also completely human.
That's a good question. Is that human? To act in accordance with your feelings without thinking about consequences? There is a considerable cultural bias towards this view (e.g. in movies), that feelings and emotions and opinions are equally valid as more rational behaviour.
Imagine the scene if the parents see the dog getting lost and they go nuts and very sad but they don't go in. Maybe the wife moves towards the water but the man holds her back and tells her it's too dangerous. And they are very sad but understand they are powerless in this moment.
Wouldn't that have been much more "human"? To feel sad and powerless in a cruel universe but holding on for dear life.
But you are probably right, we are all far more guided by our emotions than we'd like to think. Do you think that is what the scene is about? I definitely have to watch the movie again now
-
bonsai-superstar — 11 years ago(July 18, 2014 06:09 PM)
Are you people for real? Did you understand the movie at all? Every day, people kill bugs without a second thought. Do you care if you kill an
adult
spider or a
baby
spider? Humans were (initially) like bugs to these aliens. That was
the point the filmmakers were trying to make
. 2. It's
fiction
. Can you understand that no babies were actually harmed during the making of this FILM? 3. Grow up. Jesus.