Discuter de La Corde
Discuter → Films → La Corde → Générales
Spoilers- question about Rupert's philosophies
posté par issnceSTAFFMOD le 8 juillet 2022 à 20h46
I don't really understand why Rupert disapproves of the David murder so strongly.
It seems as basic as, "Prior to experiencing David's murder first-hand, Rupert naively believed that some people should be allowed to murder others. After Rupert experienced the realities and emotions related to having a close 'friend' killed, he changed his mind".
In short, Rupert did not think far enough ahead when he advocated for murder. (Or, Rupert did not consider the emotions and consequences that murder have on people, when he advocated for murder).
I don't know. That seems really stupid.
It seems like poor writing to have Rupert portrayed as the smartest person in the room, stand up in front of strangers professing his well-developed lifelong beliefs in murder, then 30 minutes later have an emotional breakdown when he experiences the realities.
Maybe that's the "point". If so, it seems very blase.
Maybe it's due to (my) not knowing David. Perhaps David was exceptional. I think all we really heard was: David was rich (convo with Janet), David was probably coddled (relation with father/mother), and David was possibly inferior to Kenneth (Kenneth dumped Janet, Janet started dating David). I'm sure there were other relevant discussions of David which I forget.
Other than that, I really enjoyed the movie. I noticed the long takes. I thought the actors did well. I think it's a fine movie in 2022.
Réponse de rooprect
le 9 juillet 2022 à 16h59
The complexity of Rupert's character is hard to convey in an 80 min movie... If you're familiar with the book Crime & Punishment, that exactly what Rupert experiences. Rupert, like C&P's Raskolnikov, is an intellectual who thinks he has morality worked out in his head. There's even a tinge of arrogance in both their cases, setting up both for a 'morality tale' downfall. The story of Crime & Punishment as well as Rope is designed to show the brutal division between theory and reality--how naïve the beard-stroking intellectuals are and as you pointed out how quickly they come apart when faced with reality rather than theory.
Another great film that illustrates this in an even more disturbing way is Peter Jackson's Beautiful Creatures (2000) where 2 young girls work out the perfect calculated murder, but the reality of it turns out to be atrocious.
If you have a couple months to burn lol, read Crime & Punishment, which I'm sure served as the framework for this story. 3/4 of the book is about Raskolnikov's descent whereas here Jimmy Stewart only had 15 mins, but I think he did a great job.
Réponse de issnce
le 9 juillet 2022 à 18h58
Thanks, I haven't read C&P, but your explanation makes sense. I'll add Beautiful Creatures to the watch list. I agree; I'm not much of a classic-movie-watcher, but I was impressed enough with Stewart to bookmark a few of his other films.
Réponse de rooprect
le 9 juillet 2022 à 19h25
C&P is worth reading if you dug the themes in Rope… It’s about a young guy who decides that “super men” are above common morality so they should be free to commit murder. He almost randomly kills someone, but then he starts sinking into madness, hallucinating the victim’s eyes watching him, etc. So it’s a lot more psychological than Rope which might graze over the character’s change of heart, but you’re right Jimmy Stewart can’t go wrong. Especially when teamed up with Hitchcock.
PS… Oops, it’s HEAVENLY Creatures… I think Beautiful Creatures was a comedy haha