Controversy over "Million Dollar Baby" (SPOILERS! You have been warned!) - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

lurkette · 02-07-2005, 11:25 AM

SPOILER ALERT! If you have not yet seen "Million Dollar Baby" and would like to go in without knowing the plot, GO AWAY NOW!

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/....ap/index.html

Quote:

The backlash over 'Million Dollar Baby'
Film's twist has stirred up controversy
Monday, February 7, 2005 Posted: 1438 GMT (2238 HKT)

Editor's Note: The following Associated Press story reveals plot points in the Oscar-nominated film "Million Dollar Baby." If you'd rather not know what they are, please stop reading now.

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Not everyone is in Clint Eastwood's corner as his acclaimed boxing drama "Million Dollar Baby" heads into the Academy Awards.

(Spoiler alert: The rest of this story could ruin the movie for you.)

The film, which is in a tight race with the Howard Hughes epic "The Aviator" for best picture, stars Eastwood as old-school boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, who becomes mentor to peppy fighter Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank).

A father-daughter relationship blossoms between the two as Frankie coaches Maggie through a meteoric rise to champion status in the film's feel-good "Rocky"-like first two acts.

The closing chapter presents a cruel twist, however.

(The next paragraph gives it away.)

An opponent blindsides Maggie, leaving her paralyzed from the neck down. Maggie decides she would rather die, and she asks Frankie to help end her life. After some moral agonizing, Frankie does.

Some conservative critics and groups representing the disabled say "Million Dollar Baby" is a sucker punch against the notion that people with paralyzing infirmities can lead lives worth living.

The film's harshest detractors say it's little more than propaganda supporting legalization of assisted suicide. Director and star Eastwood says the characters' choices are rooted in the story and that the movie is not about euthanasia.

Marcie Roth, executive director of the National Spinal Cord Injury Association, said her group has been working to improve conditions for the disabled since 1948, "yet lo these many years later, many people still think having a spinal-cord injury is a fate worse than death.

"Unfortunately, a message like the one in 'Million Dollar Baby' just perpetuates exactly what we work so hard to dispel."

The film earned directing prizes for Eastwood at the Golden Globes and last weekend's Directors Guild of America Awards, positioning him as the front-runner for the same honor at the Oscars February 27. Swank received the Golden Globe for best dramatic actress, and she, Eastwood and co-star Morgan Freeman earned Oscar acting nominations.

Swank and Freeman also won Screen Actors Guild awards Saturday night.

'A movie for mature audiences' or 'political propaganda'?
Fans of the film disagree that it favors assisted suicide. Chicago Sun-Times critic Roger Ebert ranked "Million Dollar Baby" as his No. 1 film of 2004 even though he disagrees with Frankie's actions.

Maggie's desire to die and Frankie's decision to help were choices consistent with the nature of the characters, Ebert said.

Eastwood -- with Swank at the SAG Awards Saturday -- says the film doesn't send a general message, nor necessarily match his own views.
"It's a movie for grown-up, mature audiences in which people do things we don't necessarily agree with," Ebert told The Associated Press. "What kind of movies would there be if we expected everyone in them to do what we think they should do?"

"Million Dollar Baby" also has come under fire from such conservative commentators as Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved and Debbie Schlussel, who predicted on her Web site that Eastwood's film will triumph at the Oscars "because it's Hollywood's best political propaganda of the year. ... because it supports killing the handicapped, literally putting their lights out."

Eastwood declined an interview request but told The New York Times that the film stuck closely to its source material, a story by F.X. Toole.

"How the character handles it is certainly different than how I might handle it if I were in that position in real life," Eastwood said. "Every story is a 'what if.' "

Eastwood's critics say the movie is his latest salvo against the disabled community. In 2000, Eastwood testified before a U.S. House subcommittee asking that the Americans with Disabilities Act be amended to allow businesses such as his hotel in Carmel, Calif., more time to comply.

His testimony came after a disabled woman sued him because his historic inn lacked wheelchair access. A jury sided with Eastwood on all but two minor violations.

An Oscar tradition, of sorts

The disability group Not Dead Yet -- including David Mitchell, center, his wife Sharon Snyder, left, and his daughter Emma -- is upset with the film.
While "Million Dollar Baby" has drawn the harshest reaction, many of the same critics are bothered by the Spanish film "The Sea Inside," starring Javier Bardem as Ramon Sampedro, who fought a 30-year campaign for his right to die after a paralyzing accident. The film is among Oscar nominees for best foreign-language picture.

Both movies draw on stereotypes that disabled people cannot lead worthwhile lives, said Stephen Drake, a researcher for Chicago-based Not Dead Yet, a group that has held protests at theaters showing "Million Dollar Baby."

"I really can't imagine this kind of awards attention for somebody who put out a film that relies on the worst stereotypes the audience holds about homosexuality," Drake said.

The high profile of Oscar contenders often brings out the critics.

"A Beautiful Mind," the 2001 best-picture winner, drew complaints for omitting unflattering aspects about the life of mathematician John Forbes Nash. Similar gripes were aimed at 2000's "The Hurricane," which earned a best-actor nomination for Denzel Washington, who played boxer Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, imprisoned nearly 20 years for three murders before the convictions were overturned.

Tobacco companies criticized the whistle-blower drama "The Insider," a 1999 best-picture nominee, saying the film took liberties to place their industry in a harsher light. "60 Minutes" correspondent Mike Wallace also said "The Insider" painted an unfair picture of how he and the news show handled a confrontation with the tobacco industry.

"The Academy Awards are a huge platform for all kinds of people with all kinds of agendas, some worthy and some not so worthy," said Peter Rainer, contributing editor for New York magazine and past president of the National Society of Film Critics, which picked "Million Dollar Baby" as best film of 2004.

"It's an irresistible force for people to try to piggyback on to, to try to walk in that spotlight and get something out of it for themselves," added Rainer, who said he liked "Million Dollar Baby" but that it was not one of his top film choices of last year.

This just bothers me. I haven't seen the film, but from what I gather it's not about killing quadriplegics, it's about one person's CHOICE to die. I fail to understand why people think that positively depicting (DEPICTING, not even advocating for) one choice automatically invalidates alternative choices. Some people may want to live after a debilitating accident or illness - I applaud their courage. But why can't they grant other people the right to choose to live, or die, as they see fit? This kind of hard-line thinking just bothers me. People have no tolerance for ambiguity, I swear.

Hanabal · 02-07-2005, 11:35 AM

i agree with you, but you have to remember there is this culture to do what ever you see on tv or the movies, so dont be surprised if suicide rates go up noticibly after the movie.

Its not the movies fault, its not the disabled societies fault, its the general populations fault that cant separate reality from a movie.

warrrreagl · 02-07-2005, 12:44 PM

Conflicted.

I agree with Eastwood's main points in that movies are not supposed to reflect only the good choices in life; sometimes people make hard choices and this movie reflects that. I will forever stand shoulder to shoulder with Eastwood and anyone else who seeks to keep movies separated from social and political pressure.

However, I also saw the movie and hated it all the way around. That specific plot twist we're talking about totally ruined the movie for me.

Blaspheme · 02-07-2005, 01:14 PM

My viewpoint is that this is a good example of the "PC" crowd looking for their next victim. Popular entertainment, we're coming to get you!

Now, this is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but if you want to see where this kind of thing has the world heading go watch Demolition Man.

"I've seen the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47 year old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, and singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener."

Except of course, he probably wouldn't be able to sing about beef products without offending some cows. We couldn't have that.

ckerus · 02-07-2005, 01:16 PM

People at work listen to talk radio all day, so I get to listen to the Michael Medved show almost daily. He has been one of the people who strongly criticizes the movie. Though he criticizes the film for decieving its viewers into believing its a "Rocky" type movie, rather than liberal propaganda. I haven't seen the movie yet myself, but don't see what all the fuss is about. It's a movie. It's meant to entertain.

vox_rox · 02-07-2005, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lurkette

This just bothers me. I haven't seen the film, but from what I gather it's not about killing quadriplegics, it's about one person's CHOICE to die.

Actually, not quite right. The film is NOT about one person's choice to die. The movie is about the struggle to live life, and to take the road that you choose, and to accept whatever that road offers you as a consequence of your choices.

The central act in this film is not the death of Maggie, it is the success she lived because of her determination to do what she really wanted to do. The actual act of death is not about killing paraplegics or quadraplegics because they have no value, it is about respect for the choice of others.

Would I have euthanized Maggie? No I would not have. But as Roger Ebert so succinctly put it, what kind of movies would we have if everyone did everything we thought they should.

This is Story Telling, not instruction. This is, as Eastwood said, a "what if" scenario, not a manifesto on what we should do with poeple suffering with spinal cord injuries.

What this movie ofers is great art diection, excellent dialogue that creates deep and feeling characters that move the plot nicely, and an engaging story of people who are struggling through life with self-doubt, regret, and even joy, things that make all of our lives full, and things we have all experienced to varying degrees.

See the movie for a really good movie. Don't see the movie looking for some moralistic tale, because that is not what I saw, and I don't think that's what it was meant to be.

And to everyone who is protesting this movie because it somehow disagrees with their nature, maybe the issue is not a physical handicap, but rather a mental handicap that prevents true understanding of something as simple as a good story, well told.

Peace,

Pierre

ziadel · 02-07-2005, 02:24 PM

Half the reason I carry a firearm is to use it against myself should I happen to fall off my motorcycle and go splat, or if I get a bad landing and I go splat on a jump...

I see nothing wrong with the movie, or people making choices when to end their lives.

Grasshopper Green · 02-07-2005, 04:38 PM

I just saw this movie last night. Never once did I think "Wow, I thought this was a boxing movie and it turned into a pro-euthanasia propaganda fest!!". My brother committed suicide; I certainly don't embrace it warmheartedly. However, his story was about a womans fight to make something of herself and realizing that dream, and finding a "family" because her own wasn't worth anything; it's not about killing her.

People need to lighten up, for Christ's sake.

OFKU0 · 02-07-2005, 07:29 PM

The reason I stopped watching movies years and years ago was because of the endless competitive subjective dialogue spewed by people whose only importance in life in that moment, is to compete with something ficticious like a movie and try to justify their existences by creating a platform for whatever moral issue they believe.

If these people just relaxed and shut the fuck up for 2 seconds instead of flapping their gums they might just realize, it's a movie. It's not real. But it's an easy target finding whatever cause is unacceptable for those with worn soapboxes.

To bad they are to fucking lazy to commit as much energy to their real cause rather than piggybacking on it when it is convienient. Do they gain notoriety? Yes. Good for them. But in a weeks time, no one cares and those who did, have forgotten. They might even remember the movie.

crxforum · 02-07-2005, 09:05 PM

Who gives a crap honestly. Every movie has their critics. I mean I remember when Chucky first came out and some hardcore doll collectors complained that their hobby was recieving horrible attention because of the movie.

Its a movie people. Its not like this is whats going on in real life. Any message a movie is out to give is not for personal, political, emotional, religious reasons. Its for financial reasons.

How many people went to see The Passion after they heard it was so antisemetic? Well how about 60% of the Jewish population in North America went to see it. Hmmm.... How about Howard Stern. People hated his show, but when the people who hated it were compared to people who loved it the people who hated it actually admitted to listening to it about 30min longer than people who loved it.

Its a movie people. Not the end of the world.

Lockjaw · 02-07-2005, 10:22 PM

I guess I need to go see this now. I never would have seen that twist coming. When I heard people talking about an unexpected twist I was half thinking it would turn out Morgan Freeman and Clint's characters would turn out to be gay lovers or something.

StephenSa · 02-08-2005, 08:07 AM

As other's have said, its just a movie. If it makes people think a bit then all the better. I haven't seen it but as origingally posted it sounds like the "controversial" issue is the disabled fighters personal choice to die. It's not as if the Eastwood character is talking her into it or its mandated by the state. She doesn't want to live life as a quadriplegic and chooses to cash out. Where's the problem? I've always thought a person had a right to decide whether their life is worth living. I see suicide as a sort of emergency rip-cord. If life becomes truly unbearable I believe I have the will and the right to end my own misery. Bye - bye folks, I'm done. I do think one should have some responsibility about one's own demise though. One shouldn't leave children to fend for themselves or loved ones with some crushing financial burden. It shouldn't be done in such a way as to have some innocent relative or stranger find your disfigured or rotting corpse so they need therapy or are scarred for life. I digress though, I suppose the issue is whether this movie is worth protesting over. I say no, the critics have blown it all way out of proportion and missed the real message of the movie.

OFKU0 · 02-08-2005, 08:27 AM

[QUOTE=crxforum]
How many people went to see The Passion after they heard it was so antisemetic?

QUOTE]

Yes The Passion. What other time in recent memory has religion and religious beliefs and opinions from all denominations been so in your face for a three month period, arguing who is more right and what religion is more significant and true to the tale. Thanks Mel.

ObieX · 02-08-2005, 09:04 AM

Its like saying Star Wars is anti-cloning propoganda, or that Harry Potter is an agent of the devil. Sometimes a movie is just a movie.

alicat · 02-14-2005, 07:11 PM

I think I must have a defective gene that makes me look at spoilers. Why, oh why couldn't it have malfunctioned in this instance? Of all the interviews, previews, etc. I've seen, not one gave me an inkling of this happening in the movie. Now I have to bite my tongue so as not to blow it for Hubby.

I've been under the impression that this film is about overcoming adversity and reaching for your dreams (which is obviously a theme in the movie). Yeah, the whole "Rocky" thing, and even though I don't really care for boxing movies, I was looking forward to seeing it because I love just about anything Clint does. I still want to see it, just kicking myself for reading beyond the spoiler warning. That twist also doesn't seem to mesh with the impressions I've gotten from interviews about the spunk and drive of Hillary Swanks character. It seems to me she would be one to push through the injury and persevere, not want to kill herself. I'll just have to see it though to understand I suppose.

Ali

Sensei · 02-15-2005, 12:19 AM

I just saw this tonight and I agree with Roger Ebert that it's the best movie of the five nominated <i>(Finding Neverland, Ray, Aviator, Sideways</I> I admire the producers for green-lighting such a shocking plot twist that could have spelled box office poison.

Back to the issue at hand, the thought of the movie as part of a political agenda did not even cross my mind until I clicked this thread. It is entirely in Maggie's character to ask what she did of Frankie.

degrawj · 02-15-2005, 09:43 AM

jeebus h. christ man. i saw the movie last week, and this is my opinion: if i got in an accident and became a quadrapaligic, where i have to have a respirator on 24/7, i would rather die. plain and simple. how the fuck can i live an acceptable life that way? some people feel they can, and that's great. but not me. with that said, it's just a movie people. get over it.

raeanna74 · 02-15-2005, 10:00 AM

The only problem I could see with this movie is for a person who's just been dealt this kind of blow. When a person first wakes to find themselves paralyzed many people consider thoughts of ending it all. It's not until they've pushed themselves to get past this that they begin to value their lives again. This kind of movie viewed by a person in that particular position is not going to help them.

On the other hand I cannot imagine forcing a person to continue living a life where they are completely helpless and unable to do anything for themselves or others. Myself in that position - I honestly cannot say what I'd ultimately choose. I know I'd consider ending it all but wouldn't I really want to go through with it?

It frustrates me that people would get so upset about this kind of movie. The groups that say this is propaganda pushing euthanasia. Even if it is - don't people have their own minds and question things?? It seems people in the U.S. at least frequently question the government and the entertainment industry. I don't see this kind of thing seriously affecting the suicide rates. Though I would really be interested in watching the statistics before and after the release.

wolf · 02-15-2005, 08:09 PM

I think that people need to lighten up a bit. One this is entertainment, not a life statement. Two, this is one opinion of one "fictional" person. Meaning, hi, its a movie, don't translate to real life. This is how the story unfolds for this person in this story, not you sir or madam who are unfortunately paralyzed. I feel awful for anyone in that predictament, and of course their lives are worth living and they can still make very valuable contrubutions to society, hell ususally more so than the rest of us who are just fine. No one should take their lives based on a movie. No one should take their lives because they wake up to find themselves paralyzed, but especially not because of a movie!!!...

Do the Die Hard movies say "Hey quick go find a drunk used up totally spent cop, he'll save the world?" No.

izzzzy · 02-19-2005, 04:06 AM

I read the book the short story came from a couple years ago. "rope burns by f.x. toole. "Irecallit as a powerful collection,well written and entertaining .

Supple Cow · 02-20-2005, 05:49 PM

I just saw the movie and found it very touching and inspirational in a lot of different ways. It pains me that there is yet another media circus dancing around it screaming bloody murder over something that is really peripheral to the movie. Yes, I think it's peripheral that she was paralyzed from the neck down. I think that even if she had lost only an arm and couldn't box anymore, she would probably have come to the same conclusion: that her life was over because boxing was her life. It seems to me that some people just love to focus all their attention on a few specific trees when there's a whole forest to marvel at.

02-07-2005, 11:35 AM	#2 (permalink)
Hanabal Insane Location: Auckland	i agree with you, but you have to remember there is this culture to do what ever you see on tv or the movies, so dont be surprised if suicide rates go up noticibly after the movie. Its not the movies fault, its not the disabled societies fault, its the general populations fault that cant separate reality from a movie. __________________ I am Hanabal, Phear my elephants

02-07-2005, 12:44 PM	#3 (permalink)
warrrreagl pinche vato Location: backwater, Third World, land of cotton	Conflicted. I agree with Eastwood's main points in that movies are not supposed to reflect only the good choices in life; sometimes people make hard choices and this movie reflects that. I will forever stand shoulder to shoulder with Eastwood and anyone else who seeks to keep movies separated from social and political pressure. However, I also saw the movie and hated it all the way around. That specific plot twist we're talking about totally ruined the movie for me. __________________ Living is easy with eyes closed.

02-07-2005, 01:14 PM	#4 (permalink)
Blaspheme Tilted Location: Oregon, USA	My viewpoint is that this is a good example of the "PC" crowd looking for their next victim. Popular entertainment, we're coming to get you! Now, this is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but if you want to see where this kind of thing has the world heading go watch Demolition Man. "I've seen the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47 year old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, and singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener." Except of course, he probably wouldn't be able to sing about beef products without offending some cows. We couldn't have that. __________________ Faith: not wanting to know what is true. ~Friedrich Nietzsche

02-07-2005, 02:24 PM	#7 (permalink)
ziadel Myrmidon Location: In the twilight and mist.	Half the reason I carry a firearm is to use it against myself should I happen to fall off my motorcycle and go splat, or if I get a bad landing and I go splat on a jump... I see nothing wrong with the movie, or people making choices when to end their lives. __________________ Ron Paul '08 Vote for Freedom Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

02-07-2005, 07:29 PM	#9 (permalink)
OFKU0 Junk	The reason I stopped watching movies years and years ago was because of the endless competitive subjective dialogue spewed by people whose only importance in life in that moment, is to compete with something ficticious like a movie and try to justify their existences by creating a platform for whatever moral issue they believe. If these people just relaxed and shut the fuck up for 2 seconds instead of flapping their gums they might just realize, it's a movie. It's not real. But it's an easy target finding whatever cause is unacceptable for those with worn soapboxes. To bad they are to fucking lazy to commit as much energy to their real cause rather than piggybacking on it when it is convienient. Do they gain notoriety? Yes. Good for them. But in a weeks time, no one cares and those who did, have forgotten. They might even remember the movie. __________________ " In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

02-07-2005, 01:16 PM	#5 (permalink)
ckerus Upright Location: La Mirada, Ca	People at work listen to talk radio all day, so I get to listen to the Michael Medved show almost daily. He has been one of the people who strongly criticizes the movie. Though he criticizes the film for decieving its viewers into believing its a "Rocky" type movie, rather than liberal propaganda. I haven't seen the movie yet myself, but don't see what all the fuss is about. It's a movie. It's meant to entertain.

02-07-2005, 04:38 PM	#8 (permalink)
Grasshopper Green ...is a comical chap Location: Where morons reign supreme	I just saw this movie last night. Never once did I think "Wow, I thought this was a boxing movie and it turned into a pro-euthanasia propaganda fest!!". My brother committed suicide; I certainly don't embrace it warmheartedly. However, his story was about a womans fight to make something of herself and realizing that dream, and finding a "family" because her own wasn't worth anything; it's not about killing her. People need to lighten up, for Christ's sake.

02-07-2005, 09:05 PM	#10 (permalink)
crxforum Crazy	Who gives a crap honestly. Every movie has their critics. I mean I remember when Chucky first came out and some hardcore doll collectors complained that their hobby was recieving horrible attention because of the movie. Its a movie people. Its not like this is whats going on in real life. Any message a movie is out to give is not for personal, political, emotional, religious reasons. Its for financial reasons. How many people went to see The Passion after they heard it was so antisemetic? Well how about 60% of the Jewish population in North America went to see it. Hmmm.... How about Howard Stern. People hated his show, but when the people who hated it were compared to people who loved it the people who hated it actually admitted to listening to it about 30min longer than people who loved it. Its a movie people. Not the end of the world.

02-07-2005, 10:22 PM	#11 (permalink)
Lockjaw Junkie	I guess I need to go see this now. I never would have seen that twist coming. When I heard people talking about an unexpected twist I was half thinking it would turn out Morgan Freeman and Clint's characters would turn out to be gay lovers or something.

02-08-2005, 08:07 AM	#12 (permalink)
StephenSa Psycho Location: Dallas, Texas	As other's have said, its just a movie. If it makes people think a bit then all the better. I haven't seen it but as origingally posted it sounds like the "controversial" issue is the disabled fighters personal choice to die. It's not as if the Eastwood character is talking her into it or its mandated by the state. She doesn't want to live life as a quadriplegic and chooses to cash out. Where's the problem? I've always thought a person had a right to decide whether their life is worth living. I see suicide as a sort of emergency rip-cord. If life becomes truly unbearable I believe I have the will and the right to end my own misery. Bye - bye folks, I'm done. I do think one should have some responsibility about one's own demise though. One shouldn't leave children to fend for themselves or loved ones with some crushing financial burden. It shouldn't be done in such a way as to have some innocent relative or stranger find your disfigured or rotting corpse so they need therapy or are scarred for life. I digress though, I suppose the issue is whether this movie is worth protesting over. I say no, the critics have blown it all way out of proportion and missed the real message of the movie.

02-08-2005, 08:27 AM	#13 (permalink)
OFKU0 Junk	[QUOTE=crxforum] How many people went to see The Passion after they heard it was so antisemetic? QUOTE] Yes The Passion. What other time in recent memory has religion and religious beliefs and opinions from all denominations been so in your face for a three month period, arguing who is more right and what religion is more significant and true to the tale. Thanks Mel. __________________ " In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

02-08-2005, 09:04 AM	#14 (permalink)
ObieX Pickles Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)	Its like saying Star Wars is anti-cloning propoganda, or that Harry Potter is an agent of the devil. Sometimes a movie is just a movie. __________________ We Must Dissent.

02-14-2005, 07:11 PM	#15 (permalink)
alicat Baffled Location: West Michigan	I think I must have a defective gene that makes me look at spoilers. Why, oh why couldn't it have malfunctioned in this instance? Of all the interviews, previews, etc. I've seen, not one gave me an inkling of this happening in the movie. Now I have to bite my tongue so as not to blow it for Hubby. I've been under the impression that this film is about overcoming adversity and reaching for your dreams (which is obviously a theme in the movie). Yeah, the whole "Rocky" thing, and even though I don't really care for boxing movies, I was looking forward to seeing it because I love just about anything Clint does. I still want to see it, just kicking myself for reading beyond the spoiler warning. That twist also doesn't seem to mesh with the impressions I've gotten from interviews about the spunk and drive of Hillary Swanks character. It seems to me she would be one to push through the injury and persevere, not want to kill herself. I'll just have to see it though to understand I suppose. Ali __________________ 'Beware the Jabberwock, my son! The jaws that bite, the claws that catch! Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun, The frumious Bandersnatch!'--Jabberwocky, Lewis Carroll "You cannot do a kindness too soon because you never know how soon it will be too late."--Ralph Waldo Emerson

02-15-2005, 12:19 AM	#16 (permalink)
Sensei Black Belt in Slacking Off Location: Portland Or-ah-gun	I just saw this tonight and I agree with Roger Ebert that it's the best movie of the five nominated <i>(Finding Neverland, Ray, Aviator, Sideways</I> I admire the producers for green-lighting such a shocking plot twist that could have spelled box office poison. Back to the issue at hand, the thought of the movie as part of a political agenda did not even cross my mind until I clicked this thread. It is entirely in Maggie's character to ask what she did of Frankie. __________________ Slacking off with style since 1981.

02-15-2005, 09:43 AM	#17 (permalink)
degrawj I'm still waiting... Location: West Linn, OR	jeebus h. christ man. i saw the movie last week, and this is my opinion: if i got in an accident and became a quadrapaligic, where i have to have a respirator on 24/7, i would rather die. plain and simple. how the fuck can i live an acceptable life that way? some people feel they can, and that's great. but not me. with that said, it's just a movie people. get over it.

02-15-2005, 10:00 AM	#18 (permalink)
raeanna74 I'm not a blonde! I'm knot! I'm knot! I'm knot! Location: Upper Michigan	The only problem I could see with this movie is for a person who's just been dealt this kind of blow. When a person first wakes to find themselves paralyzed many people consider thoughts of ending it all. It's not until they've pushed themselves to get past this that they begin to value their lives again. This kind of movie viewed by a person in that particular position is not going to help them. On the other hand I cannot imagine forcing a person to continue living a life where they are completely helpless and unable to do anything for themselves or others. Myself in that position - I honestly cannot say what I'd ultimately choose. I know I'd consider ending it all but wouldn't I really want to go through with it? It frustrates me that people would get so upset about this kind of movie. The groups that say this is propaganda pushing euthanasia. Even if it is - don't people have their own minds and question things?? It seems people in the U.S. at least frequently question the government and the entertainment industry. I don't see this kind of thing seriously affecting the suicide rates. Though I would really be interested in watching the statistics before and after the release. __________________ "Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama My Karma just ran over your Dogma.

02-15-2005, 08:09 PM	#19 (permalink)
wolf Ravenous Location: Right Behind You	I think that people need to lighten up a bit. One this is entertainment, not a life statement. Two, this is one opinion of one "fictional" person. Meaning, hi, its a movie, don't translate to real life. This is how the story unfolds for this person in this story, not you sir or madam who are unfortunately paralyzed. I feel awful for anyone in that predictament, and of course their lives are worth living and they can still make very valuable contrubutions to society, hell ususally more so than the rest of us who are just fine. No one should take their lives based on a movie. No one should take their lives because they wake up to find themselves paralyzed, but especially not because of a movie!!!... Do the Die Hard movies say "Hey quick go find a drunk used up totally spent cop, he'll save the world?" No. __________________ Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this. Last edited by wolf; 02-15-2005 at 08:12 PM..

02-19-2005, 04:06 AM	#20 (permalink)
izzzzy Crazy Location: SW NEW HAMPSHIRE	I read the book the short story came from a couple years ago. "rope burns by f.x. toole. "Irecallit as a powerful collection,well written and entertaining .

02-20-2005, 05:49 PM	#21 (permalink)
Supple Cow Americow, the Beautiful Location: Washington, D.C.	I just saw the movie and found it very touching and inspirational in a lot of different ways. It pains me that there is yet another media circus dancing around it screaming bloody murder over something that is really peripheral to the movie. Yes, I think it's peripheral that she was paralyzed from the neck down. I think that even if she had lost only an arm and couldn't box anymore, she would probably have come to the same conclusion: that her life was over because boxing was her life. It seems to me that some people just love to focus all their attention on a few specific trees when there's a whole forest to marvel at. __________________ "I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. Twenty-six times I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed." (Michael Jordan)