TF Views

I still hold that my original interpretation of the scene is the one that personally works for me. I acknowledge that Hitchcock intended something different, and can accept that too, but I'm not giving up my view of the scene.

But, it is not about what works for the viewer. It is, or at least should be, about what the author is actually saying.

And, it sounds like Hitchcock was pretty clear on this.

Yeah, except that she didn't lose her mind. Not in the least.

Wait, isn't she conflating herself with the dead victims? That sounds pretty darned crazy on some level.

Well there you have it. I think we'll never agree on this issue. So anyway, let's move on, I guess.

Oh, and she definitely wasn't crazy. You'd have to see it.

I've never seen it, but it sounds like it actually could be a little of both. Y'know like she was saying "You're an evil man who hurts people and now you've hurt me". Like she was pointing out that even though he didn't kill her, he was still hurting her and as such she is also one of his victims. But, she would still have to be pretty bold to point that out to him in that way in an open setting like that.

Is this where we're talking about the author intent thing now?

http://www.overthinkingit.com/2010/12/1 ... ead-creep/

They mention something in there about that.

I guess. I kinda thought it had been resolved, but hey. Since it's still going I have a question for Dom: If the room is a candy store and they don't have the candy you want, but they order it and it comes in later, how does that work with your analogy? Or better yet, if you go into the candy store and they say they don't have the one you want and then you go back later and they find it behind some other candy where it wasn't supposed to be?

Ordering more candy would effectively make it a different store for the purposes of this analogy. Finding mis-stocked candy would be an author/editor error.

So it turns out that JCVD is actually a REALLY entertaining and engaging--

...Candy stores?

U gaiz.

Hehehe... Yeah... I was just razzin Dom a bit

JCVD? Why do I know that...?

Shockwave
-Is now hungry for candy.

It's a Belgian (i.e. French language) film where Van Damme plays himself, trying to pay his alimony and getting caught up in a bank heist. The villain is fantastic, but plays second fiddle to the tone. I went into it just expecting a campy, self-indulgent action flick, and I was VERY pleasantly surprised. The way it uses Van Damme's image as an action star really is perfect. It's actually my girlfriend's most recent favourite movie, and that's a high bar. And it's the first piece of fiction to make me go WO-HO since the episode of Venture Bros. where Sgt. Hatred suddenly shoots Rusty in the gut after seeming like such a nice guy.

Right, Jean Claude Van Damme. Y'know I actually did know that, just couldn't remember. Sounds good though, I'll have to check it out. Oh, hey look! We're back on topic! I went and saw HP7 on Imax Sunday night. It was nice to get away from renovating for a while. Plus they did a really good job with it, very true to the book and "magically" back on track after the last one.