I hope there’s a Darth Arth out there somewhere. Just because.
A movie where Louise acts out of pure self defense would be very different. You’re not the first poster here to say that they think it would have been smarter for Louise to just turn herself in, and that’s with a movie where she actually did unlawfully kill a man. If she had acted purely out of self-defense/defense of another then either she sensibly turns herself in and the movie is a courtroom drama rather than a modern Western/road movie, or she needs to have some compelling new reason to flee the scene along with Thelma. It’s possible to think of such reasons, like the local police are notoriously corrupt, but that would be a very different and IMHO less interesting movie.
I have heard that Thelma & Louise was pitched as basically “Butch & Sundance, but they’re women!” While there are many differences between Thelma & Louise and Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid, in both cases our heroes deliberately commit a series of crimes and in both cases they choose not to surrender at the end even when they know there’s little if any chance they could still escape alive. If that’s not the type of movie you like then that’s of course your right, but both Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid and Thelma & Louise are well-regarded by critics. Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid was a much bigger commercial success, but Thelma & Louise seems to have done decent business and the ending in particular is very well-known even today. (It was a bit of a shock to realize just now that Thelma & Louise is nearly 20 years old!)
The only alternate ending I’ve heard of is one where the car crash was actually shown. I’m not sure if this was shot or not, but apparently there were concerns that it would look too fake. The actual ending of the film is very similar to that of Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid, stopping just before the deaths of the main characters.
In the 2001 film In the Bedroom, I understood the entire plot. Great movie. But after I saw it, everyone was talking about the amazing symbolism, that the movie was allegorical, and that the movie’s title was particularly significant. Okay, when Tom Wilkinson comes home at the end, he finds his wife Sissy Spacek waiting for him ‘in the bedroom.’ What significance does this hold? Is there some deeper meaning to the film that went over my head?
I guess I realize that I understood the scene just fine, I now realize I simply didn’t LIKE the scene. 20 years ago huh? No wonder I barely remember it. All this time I could have sworn that they were forced into running from the law primarily because of the scene with the rape (near rape?), for some reason, I’d always remember them as hapless victims of circumstances stemming from that rape or near rape.
bolding mine.
This is rarely an indication of a movies actual “goodness” though. 
I just remember the film as “fun, fun, interesting, WHOA didn’t see that coming, fun, hey, who’s that cute blonde actor? exciting, wow OH DAMN, what a bummer, you guys SUCK who wrote that ending?”!
Because Darth Sidious sent him there to do it. Don’t you remember the light saber duel as they left Tatooine? He failed, but if he had been successful, Palpatine’s real plot would have been foiled. Thus the story really makes no sense.
I’m afraid you’re misunderstanding me. I am not confused, I am bewildered by the movie. It is my fav Lynch movie. And when I see people giving the world the ultimate explanation for Mulholland Drive, I’m afraid they havent understood the movie AT ALL. It reminds me of Blade Runner (the movie) fans insisting that Deckard is a replicant. NO, he ISNT a replicant, but he could very well be one. That’s the point of the movie, and that’s the point of Mulholland Drive as well.
I’m afraid some people just cant process ambiguity. Too bad when it’s the very heart of a story.
The movie “Minority Report”, IMHO, never satisfactorily explains how Pre-crime passes Constitutional muster. Nor does it explain how the 3 pre-cogs are going to be able to cover the entire country with their gift. How are those searching spiders not violating the 4th Amendment?
Also, unless I missed something, it never says how long people have to be kept imprisoned with the halo. Forever?
And then there is the movie “Circle of Iron”. I’ve talked about that freaky mess in the past. The talking monkeys, the guy in the urn of oil trying to dissolve his prick away. Where was this supposed to take place, and what period of history did it take place. None of the symbolisms were ever explained, the story took 2 hours for the simple moral of “finding ones self”. WTF?
Which one? Where he gasses the investors or the planes at the end? For the latter I assumed that the canisters had been switched and everyone was just pretending to fall asleep.
“Vanishing Point” – what was Kowalski’s big hurry to get to San Fran? And, you know, why crash into two bulldozers and explode into flames at the end after all that flashy driving.
“Gone in 60 Seconds” – what kind of stupid idea was it to put back Eleanor and go find another one? It was explained in the movie (the owner didn’t have insurance, big whoop) but it was still an unimaginably stupid, senseless idea. I think the chick who insisted was the guy’s sister, so presumably he wasn’t trying to bang her, and regardless, going to jail for a long time and possibly cracking up in a bad wreck isn’t worth a little tail anyway.
inception?
it was a near rape. as far as being victims of circumstances vs. just running from the law i always saw it as being a little of both. when thelma robbed the convenience store, she had a good reason- louise’s money was stolen from them by brad pitt’s character, and they needed cash. but then other things, like when they blow the truck up by firing a gun at it, they do for no good reason, the guy was just a tool and they got carried away teaching him a lesson.
as far as the end, different strokes, i suppose. i think it’s a great ending, it packs an emotional punch, it’s remembered 20 years later, and as lamia notes, they chose to die free. for me that was a pretty powerful choice. i wouldn’t change a thing.
How would killing the Jedi on Tatooine foil Sidious’ plot?
I don’t know the answers to all your questions, but I think the pre-cogs were active for one small area. (DC?)
That’s why the big bad was especially aggressive: he was trying to keep up its good appearance as it left being just a pilot program into going national.
Exactly! Remember, Palpatine had no clue about Anakin or his ability and already had an apprentice (Maul, you’re fired!) He wanted to get rid of Qui-Gon from the very beginning, probably because he was the only Jedi who could think outside the box enough to realize what was going on before Palpatine was ready.
Take this as a snark or not, but it seems it wold be a natural development given the courts’ attitude about the 4th Amendment re: DUI checkpoints.
I may be misremembering but didn’t the director, Howard Hawkes, call Raymond Chandler to ask him who killed a certain character and even Chandler didn’t know?
When I heard that anecdote, I gratefully gave up trying to piece together everything in that movie and now I just go with the flow.
In Highlander, the girl finds pieces of metal from the sword that date back to 6th century BC in Japan and there is a big deal about Japan not having that technology back then
but I thought only Sean Connery had that sword from Japan, and it was a big deal because he got it as a gift from a king
so is someone else using Sean Connery’s sword, or does everyone have a sword from Japan or what?
Which part don’t you understand? SPOILERS: It takes place in the near future where the military has created a device which can connect people in the same lucid dream, which creative people have used for making cool shit or exploring the mind, and conmen have used for finding out people’s secrets. Time in the dream is slower, and a dream within a dream is a factor slower, etc. Cobb and his wife decided to explore the most nested dream level and lived there for years (to them) but his wife lost touch with reality so he tricked her into realizing she was in a dream. Unfortunately, when she woke up, the trick made her still think she was dreaming so she committed suicide to wake up, and fingered Cobb for her death so he’d join her. Cobb no longer able to work legitimately turns to stealing secrets in the dream. A wealthy industrialist offers to solve his legal issues if he instead of stealing a secret implants an idea in a rival. He assembles his team, and despite various obstacles, succeeds in his mission.
Sigh.. my edit window ran out…
anyway
Well, they do have those scenes where the murder ball is brought via video chat to several judges to approve the arrest warrant. It’s not like they have carte blanche.
Presumably they are counting on the threat of deterrence. In DC, premeditation has gone by the wayside since it’s always caught, and only crimes of passion still occur. I think the bigger issue is: there are only 3 precogs (and only one really talented one) in existence! They will eventually die! And it’s not like they are a naturally occurring mutation. They were caused by a specific drug with side effects which has since been taken off the market. So there will be no more mutant telepath babies.
Yeah, unlike the murder ball warrant, which seems reasonable, this search seems too broad and unwarranted (a fugitive is in the neighborhood, let us search every apartment just in case!). I don’t think so.
Yep.
Although - of course, it’s in a nebulous area - is it punishment or prevention? The movie very briefly mentions other crimes, but seems to focus mainly on murder. Murder might entail a life sentence, and so a pre-murder theoretically could too, but other crimes don’t, so it would seem doubly unfair to put away a pre-crime for longer than the actual crime… Not to mention the inability of a frozen person to consult with counsel…
Yup, the chauffeur is found dead in his car, no explanation and they never bring it up again.
Trivia: The Big Lebowski is the Coen brother’s homage to The Big Sleep. ‘Donny’ Kerabatsos dieing of a heart attack was probably their take on the death of the chauffeur.