Message?
-
Gary1967 — 15 years ago(July 21, 2010 11:13 AM)
Why was it morally right for him to throw an election because he doesn't like that an ambitious student might win something he doesn't want her to win? Is it his job to overthrow the voice of the voter because he has icky personal vendettas against a teenage girl?
-
thomas-m-webster — 15 years ago(July 21, 2010 01:37 PM)
- I wasn't attempting to apply some sort of universal morality on Mr M's actions. I was only saying that Jim believed that he was doing the right thing by denying Tracy the victory. She was certainly undeserving of the presidency after her cheating and lying, and the student body did not know about these actions; or about her previous affair with Dave Novatny.
- I believe that the movie's intent was to portray Tracy as a thoroughly unlikeable character - and not an innocent victim of adult (teacher) abuse. Tracy was the icky one; not Mr M.
-
Gary1967 — 15 years ago(July 21, 2010 01:45 PM)
I don't think having an affair with Mr. Novotny should have anything to do with the outcome of an election and the student body shouldn't have been made aware of it. A minor should have a right to privacy, especially when it comes to things like statutory rape. To deny a student an opportunity in school in order to punish her for a teacher's indiscretion seems really wrong. Moreover, to deny a student an opportunity in school for anything to do with her sex life faintly smells like "punish the whore," which seems really wrong to me. She was a kid. He was a grown-up.
And I know that this makes no moral difference, but Mr. M had no real proof that Tracy ripped down the postershe actually had another student who claimed to have done it, who provided proof. Based on that evidence, he shouldn't have interferred with the election. He didn't really know that Tracy lied and cheated, he just thought she did. It was unethical of him to get involved in this instance. He might have been doing what he thought was morally right, but it wasn't his place to do anything. It was also pretty hypocritical of him to take any moral high road after he just unsuccessfully tried to beep his wife's friend, don't you think? Those in glass houses, right?
It was also unethical of him to get involved in the first place. What kind of teacher gets involved with student affairs because he can't stand ambition and because another teacher slept with a student (yuck, they're both gross. Mr. M. is unethical. Dave is immoral). Can you imagine being in school and having teachers get involved like this? I wouldn't want my daughters in that schoolthey wouldn't be safe. God forbid my daughter raises her hand too often or tries to take too many active leadership roles at school. I mean really, thank God for the "Jims" of the world who make it their business to sabotage children when they're not trying to cheat on their wives. Teachers are supposed to put their personal issues aside, teach material, and guide studentsnot have sex with them and try to ruin opportunities for the students they don't like.
Mr. M and Mr. Novotny got less than they actually deserved (which is why the ending is so funny. Mr. M is reduced to throwing a milk shake at a limo. Hilarious! :)). Mr. M might have thought he was morally right, but we, the audience, knew better (or at least, I thought we were meant to know better). It's interesting that this movie can provoke a variety of reactions though. -
thomas-m-webster — 15 years ago(July 22, 2010 06:12 AM)
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. - The Dude
I believe that Jim had all the evidence he needed to remove Tracy from candidacy, and would have done so if Tammy hadn't dropped her bombshell. Even though he "knew" that Tammy wasn't the culprit (and Tracy was), Jim was forced to accept Tammy's confession - and let Tracy go.
At the conclusion of the vote count, Jim was ready to announce that Tracy had won the election, until he spotted her acting like a jerk in the hallway. That childish demonstration put him over the edge, and it was only then that he decided to take action. I believe that the audience was meant to be on board with, or at least understanding of, Jim's decision.
Your posts seem to suggest that Jim was leching after Tracy. I say, quite the contrary. Jim was fearing the prospect of having to deal with Tracy coming on to him, especially if she won the election. Jim had the hots for Linda Navotny, or at least her cupcakes. If I were Jim, I'd be afraid that those teeth of hers would one day "cut off his Johnson." Oh yeah - they did. -
ValeriaMessalina — 11 years ago(August 11, 2014 04:46 PM)
I agree with you, sun_scryer. And Gary's comment implying some kind of misogyny on your part is way out of line in my opinion. It's like if I see a guy doing something morally reprehensible and call him on it, then I'm a misandrist. It doesn't work that way, you call a spade a spade. And Tracy was far from blameless in the situations she wound up in, and Mr. Novotny should've also probably faced harsher penalties, after all he was an adult in position of power, and he should've known better than let himself be seduced by Tracy and/or seduce her.
I had a hard time sympathizing with any character completely, although I could definitely understand where McAllister was coming from when he saw through Tracy's facade and knew what she really was inside: a power-hungry little liar, who would stop at nothing to get what she wants in life, who would trample on other people, blame others for her own misdeeds. And that's just a high school election, you can imagine how far she'd be willing to go when running for public office later in life or something with similarly high stakes. -
Gary1967 — 15 years ago(July 21, 2010 11:16 AM)
How was she "in business?" What could she have possibly gained from that affair? There was never a single moment when it was implied that she would ever gain in any way from her affair, other than that it offered her companionship when she couldn't find any among her peer group.
It's amazing how ridiculously overblown people are making this character to be. She would "kill her mother?" Pfftgive me a break. -
ceebeegee — 15 years ago(October 04, 2010 02:38 PM)
WRONG.
It is this sort of attitude that lets sexual predators in teaching positions get away with their sh*t. HE is responsible. THE ADULT is responsible. That is what the law says, that is what common sense says. THE ADULT is always reponsible. It doesn't matter if he loved her; it doesn't matter if she stripped naked and threw herself at him. She is not old enough to consent; by law, she CANNOT consent. He can, he is the one in control and therefore he is the one at fault and should be punished. -
falcon2484 — 15 years ago(October 04, 2010 05:15 PM)
You do realize we're talking about characters in a movie, right? In real life, if Tracy was my daughter or a girl that I knew, I'd probably be on her side. But I don't have any moral obligation to a FICTIONAL character, especially if he or she is presented by the screenwriter and director in an unsympathetic light, as Tracy Flick is in "Election."
Dave Novotny in this film IS responsible for his own actions, but that doesn't negate the fact that Tracy is equally culpable, and is definitely NOT an innocent little lamb, victimized by a viciously predatory sex pervert. If Tracy had rejected Dave's advances, and reported him to school officials from the get-go, I'd've had a lot more respect for her in this movie. But look at what she does. As I said, she WILLINGLY engages in a sexual relationship with him, keeps it secret from everyone (including Linda), and when it gets too heavy for her and she realizes there's no upside to continuing the relationship,
then and only then
does she turn him in.
As the filmmakers have it in "Election," this reaction is expected and programmed. It's how I'm
supposed
to see things. As bad as what Dave did is, he's still presented as a somewhat sympathetic character. I say "somewhat," because he's also presented as a sleaze, but they do show the ruin of
his
life, while Tracy suffers absolutely no consequences as a result of
her
indiscretion. If you want to attack me for how I see the characters, events and issues in "Election," please, save some of that venom for Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor.
The Falcon flies -
!!!deleted!!! (11305375) — 15 years ago(November 18, 2010 11:38 AM)
I don't think anyone can deny that Novotny wasn't responsible for what he had done and didn't deserve to be punished, what he did was not only immoral and disgusting but unethical as well. Between McAllister and Novotny although both behaved disgracefully the previous was the lesser of two evils although having said that it was pretty shocking that he never turned in his friend when he should have. Had it been discovered that he knew he could have found himself in some serious hot water. I'm not suggesting that McAllister should have turned in Novotny purely for that reason as of course it should have been because what his friend was doing was terrible. But McAllister really displayed a foolish, moronic sense of loyalty when he should have done the right thing. Not to mention that he had his wife and their potential future child to consider. How was he going to support his wife and child if he were unemployed, had it been discovered that he had kept quiet about another teacher's indiscretion his credibility as a teacher would have been dead in the water making it practically impossible to find work elsewhere in the profession.
But anyway, I'm digressing I think though while not the most culpable of the two and while an immature young girl I don't think you can cancel out completely what Tracy had done. I really don't think she was quite as nave as some would like to believe and knew what she was getting in to. More kids are clued up and should know that if a teacher cracks on to them that It's wrong and that if they do they should report them. God, even if she did have feelings for him and she was potentially looking for some companionship you have to remember that Novotny was a married man with a young child. I'm not saying Novotny Isn't completely blameless, I've said as much that he was a sleaze but that doesn't make it justifiable for her to sleep with him, surely knowing that it was wrong. Either way Novotny's marriage would have been wrecked but at least Tracy could have said she did the right thing in the first place. You have to wonder why Tracy did eventually turn him in. Was it to save herself in case they eventually got caught?
Look at it like this, if a child acts immaturely and commits vandalism or robbery do we immediately let them off the hook? Even and even if they have the guts to confess they're still punished. What got me is that in the parking lot scene outside the high school where she approaches McAllister she seems to not take any blame for what happened what so ever, pushing all the blame on to Novonty. Yes, as I stated he should have been the more responsible but that doesn't mean we have to ignore she in some capacity should have been aware that what she was doing was wrong as well. I wouldn't let Novoty get away with anything and to imply that those of us who didn't like Tracy is narrow minded. Children do things a lot they know are wrong and we as adults tell them as such when they are caught that they knew what they were doing is wrong, so why do it? Then you punish them. While Tracy shouldn't have been punished as harshly as Novotny (who frankly got off a lot easier than he deserved) she still needed to face up partially to what she had done. -
ScorpionTDC — 10 years ago(June 02, 2015 11:55 AM)
I pretty much agree with everything Falcon said in both posts
Death Awaits (Horror forum)
http://w11.zetaboards.com/Death_Awaits/index/ -
fwsauerteig — 13 years ago(January 16, 2013 06:54 AM)
Mr. McAllister's girlfriend at the end looks exactly like his wife
I disagree with that assessment. Gillian was more attractive than either Linda or his wife. Not a drop dead beauty, but not someone to be ashamed of.
I always felt that Mr. M vindicated himself in the end, but only to a degree. As Payne states in the commentary, the past always sorts of lingers.
Notwithstanding that, I submit Mr. M is in a better place than before. His girlfriend is actually somewhat attractive, he has a very cool job at one of the world's preeminent museums. Also, juxtapose his appearance in the aftermath with before. He looks stylish now, whereas before he had a bad haircut, but clothes consisting of short-sleeved dress shirts and dockers. -
SorrowNoMore — 16 years ago(July 10, 2009 06:42 PM)
ednorton-fan says that Paul was the only decent person in the film. I find that his ending bears examination, because out of all the endings in the film Jim McAllister's small apartment, Tracy Flick's limo Paul was the only one who came off happy and not lying tom himself like Jim and Tracy did.
This is because Paul looked inwardly as others on this thread have pointed out, "look inward for peace and happiness" is the point of the movie and since he took the bad with the good, and balanced it all out in his head, he came out unscathed. This is most important. Neither Jim nor Tracy will every truly be happy, Jim because of his resentment, Tracy because of her ruthlessness which will isolate her from others. But Paul is able to look inward and come to terms with everything, and in the long run, he will be happy.
Everything in this movie is shown to be temporary career, relationships, marriage but how you manage yourself when you lose those things is how well you survive. -
kevdor — 15 years ago(November 07, 2010 09:03 PM)
wow, I am actually impressed by that reply.. love the shades of grey you bring to the discussion, brings many things to talk about..
I see dumb people everywhere, and sometimes, they don't even know they're dumb! -
transmentalist — 15 years ago(November 23, 2010 11:55 PM)
A lot of great posts in this thread, but I have to chime in with harlowfan's take on the characters' unhappiness coming from their constant concern about what others are doing and feeling.
That's a mighty powerful life-lesson there!
And later, SorrowNoMore's take on Paul really hit home for me - he's happy because he realizes that things just happen, and that if his life had gone differently, he might even be dead.
One thing though - I don't think Tracy is as blameworthy in the Novotny affair as some here are making her seem. Not that I'm going to be dogmatic and claim, as one poster and as Jim McAllister himself said, that she's just a kid and he was an adult (it's true, but uninteresting with respect to this discussion).
It's just that she lacked a father figure, and friends, facts about her that Dave Novotny knew and exploited.
The pizza parlor scene is, I think, meant to depict Dave as a totally slimy opportunist, very intentionally seducing a lonely kid by playing to her solitude and ego. The fact that Tracy claims she didn't fall for Dave because she had no father figure suggests that, in fact, that's exactly why she fell for him (both her and Jim's narrations are full of obvious self-deception).
I also don't think she ratted him out; the principal said that her mother had "found" the love-note, not that Tracy had given it to her. Tracy did care about Dave (enough to wonder whether he'd finished his novel at the end - setting up that GREAT jump-cut!); she just wasn't into "mushy" love-letter stuff. -
actscene3 — 13 years ago(July 09, 2012 10:20 PM)
The interesting thing about Paul was that he had already gone through a major identity shift. His skiing accident prevented him from playing football. We are told that he was a very good player, and with his talent he may have gone on to get a scholarship at college and achieve sporting greatness. Now that very small window was gone forever.
Because of his loss he had to go through some soul searching and introspection. He seemed to come out of it with that philosophical attitude that things just happen; he was obviously sad about it, but he dealt with it. He applied this attitude throughout the movie and during the election.