Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (4499)	11/19/1997 12:15:00 AM
From: jpmac	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71178

it's been difficult to weigh in on the subject of "sling blade" I just watched the movie the other day, and was very affected by it. I so far am the only one, it seems, that does not view the woman as a wimp, but rather as one who is living under a death threat. I have, unfortunately, known many women and children, and a couple of guys, who lived with that. They were not wimps, but they were not killers. Just good people being terrorized by the depraved. It seemed to me she was forceful to the extent she could be, but understood that the man was serious about killing her. Which would have done her child no good. And if she had killed him, it would not have legally been self defense unless done as he tried to kill her, least i think that is the legally correct. And even then, a woman in a "domestic" situation is often convicted. Crazed killers seldom tell you that's what they are when you start dating. You find it out as time goes on, or when you try to leave. I thought the movie pointed to this as the case in her relationship with Doyle. And i see Carl as the type you speak of. It wasn't a grand scene of rescuing the woman or child. But rather a deliberate decision made with an awareness of the consequenses. He had grown up to learn that you are not supposed to kill and he had not planned on doing so again. And yet he had found himself in a situation where it seeemed the only option to protect and give a new life to his friends. Knowing that he would be returned to the "home" and that what he was doing was wrong. Even if done for "noble" reasons. I liked very much that this was brought out. Occasionally in a movie, when someone kills, you see the person "feeling bad". But seldom do you see them living with the realization and irrevokable consequences of that action upon their being. That no matter the reason or intentions, no amount of water or scrubbing can remove the person's blood from your hands. Or the stain from your soul. And in all his simpleness, I felt Carl knew the cost, and chose to live it. And the loss of his freedom. Locked away from the taters. I think I'll watch some cartoons this weekend.