Re: Flashbacks Of A Fool 1080p Torrent
Cherly Fleitas
Another problem is caused by the flashback structure of Beth Henley's screenplay. We begin in the present, and then begin to get glimpses of the traumatic events in Cassie's past, leading up to a touching, pathetic scene in a restaurant where Cassie is wearing balloons and has a birthday candle on her hat. She tells her boyfriend she's pregnant, and he does not learn this news with joy. She wanders out into the parking lot, her balloons sagging, and we really feel for her. But wouldn't this scene have been more effective higher up in the film, and wouldn't the whole film have had a clearer emotional line if it had been told chronologically? Sometimes flashbacks are a useful form of storytelling, but what is happening in Cassie's life is basically so simple that they come across in "Nobody's Fool" as just a writer's conceit. She has been disappointed in love, betrayed by her lover, survived a traumatic experience and is now considering whether to take a chance on this new man. This story is the very soul of straightforwardness, and the flashbacks simply delay the time when we know why we should feel real sympathy for the Arquette character.
Flashbacks of a Fool is exactly what its title announces: flashbacks of a middle-aged man (Daniel Craig) about his long-lost childhood in coastal England. Joe is a Hollywood actor and now a complete mess drowning in drugs, sex and money. When he receives a call from his mother announcing the death of his forgotten best friend, Joe dives into souvenirs of his sexual awakening in his homeland, far away from the degenerate LA where he is currently living.
This one got some pretty poor reviews. I actually thought it was pretty good. Daniel Craig plays a movie star that has seen better days. When a childhood friend passes away, Craig finally faces his childhood dramas. Craig is in the movie at the beginning and the end. The bulk of the movie takes place 25 years in the past. The movie starts to gain momentum when the flashbacks start and ends on a nice emotional note. Final thought: I liked it, though it appears not many people think that way.
I will just write my interpretation as I read a few comments and they are completely different and I do not want to poison my mind about this...
I thought it was appropriate. It may have been one night that his note referred to by quoting that song line, but she knew him longer than that and that one night was like the climax of their love, perfect. By reminding her of it he showed that he was (at least potentially) still in love with her and what it meant to him as well, something surely she doubted when seeing his dalliance that came soon afterward... It reminded her of how she originally felt about him and removed the doubt.
And in a sense I took that note, the way he could lightly write such a deep memory before leaving her, to be almost mocking their current chances of love, perhaps in a friendly way, but mocking nonetheless, not something he would do if he intended to chase her down. Perhaps to show that though embedded onto his memory he views this as something to be treasured for itself and not built upon, something from a different era. She knew as well from it being delivered at all that he had left again.
I feel like that note to her symbolized that it was over and that he was moving on. Him enjoying the company of the Eve character so soon after I think was there to emphasize just this fact. She was destroyed but he was oblivious.
I also think it was very obvious by their interactions after the funeral that she still felt a lot for him, but was holding back because of the social conventions and knowing she must grieve properly. It would not be the first time in human history a woman loved someone more than the man she ended up marrying. He was a bit harder to read, though it seemed that he felt something as well, but perhaps had a different internal reaction to it, though this is only really made obvious by his actions after that meeting.
To me it surely looked like the door was open to something more and the note was a creative way of whimsically shutting that door, as if him describing their deep interaction as "weird" afterward were not enough sign of his indifference/numbness. I doubt he intended it to devastate her but if she read from the note what I did I fully understand that being the exact effect it had on her. Just IMHO. And I think the ending made the movie. Her reaction was brilliantly deep. Leaving such an angel behind surely justified the title calling him a fool. And life is not always full of happy endings.
You forget that Ruth said to joe at the grave she went numb when boots had died .and couldn't shed a tear. She also didn't fancy boots from the off saying he was the type the picks his nose. She locked away her feelings for Joe for so long she'd lost the emotional capacity to feel anything, that was until she read the shake your ponytail line.
The moral of the story was .We all hold a candle for our fist love our first innocent kiss, no time can erode that deeply buried emotional high, we all end up with second choices , the fool was him thd flashback was hers .The final question has to be was she the fool or was he maybe they both were .
It's been more than 11 years since I first saw this movie and watched it at least a dozen times since and recommended it and cried not only for joy but thrilled for hearing the music that I love so much but for what I've read here the reviews somebody I feel his missed the boat here yet I haven't read all the reviews this is the way I see it it's plain and simple if it wasn't for the mistakes made of youth she might have slept with him that night or soon after that night on the second date but as fate made have it Joe did it right by leaving because more than likely she would never met such a kind man like the man she married and not the man that Joe turned out to be. In that respect she truly missed what she had because she never would have had it if it wasn't for Joe and as he gets on that plane I think he finally realized that it is better that he not be in her life because her life turned out better and would be better without him. Just like Joe he did what Joe did the full thinking it was all about him. He did what a real man would do and he knows it. Like the poison he he snorts and drinks in his life he would be poisoned to her. As a song goes throwing your head back in a ponytail takes you back to when you were young is a time of foolishness fun and irresponsibility that which not only that day on the second date brought death to the young girl and to a relationship the fool was branded he didn't even know that she had marked him with the kisses but I think she saw Joe just like her like most women's intuition has done at the ignorance of most boys coming of age and turning into men but in this case he was just a boy pretending to be a man running away from the equal responsibility of a child's death to a land we call never never Land AKA Hollywood. For 25 years he lived the life of a boy not of a real man like Ruth has stated her husband was something that is rare to find she says a man who lives in the moment while still being the responsible father of 4
Whether intentional or inate, every action Joe makes upto and until the letter is foolish and selfish, the prostitutes, the drugs, basically his life hasn't changed, he is still making foolish decisions just as he did in his youth; cheating on Ruth with Evelyn, running away.
But I feel the ocean float is like a baptism, unbenounced to Joe he has washed away his old self and his remeberance and Reemergence of his old town serves as his edification, eventually concluding himself that "the only thing you need courage for is for standing still" ergo he should never have left, and afford me some interpretative liberties I'd extend this to mean he also should not have cheated.
He was on a path that could lead to complete happiness (and not just for him) but his trangression or mis step off that path towards the vixen Evelyn destroyed that future (this scene had an air of fantasy specifically Little Red Riding Hood but I'm probably reading to much into it).
In the end though there are damaged parties who learn only by remembering and that is the bond that is so tactfully established by Ruth's final outburst, she much like Joe recognises what has been lost.
Southwick: That is all we have got for you. The show is edited by Rick Engdahl, with the music composed and performed by Dayana Yochim. Our email is answers.fool.com. I want to thank everyone who went to iTunes and gave us a review.
In the acoustically stunning Amstelkerk, Lloyd Cole appears to be in a much better mood than he was last year, playing at Peoples Place. 2011s tour followed the release of Coles 11th studio album and was with and about the Small Ensemble. The purpose of this years tour is T-shirts (more specifically, getting rid of them) and finds Cole performing solo again. The setlist is a varied selection from his impressive discography and its causing me to have flashbacks to specific periods of growing up with the gifted songwriter thats Lloyd Cole.
I'd like to appropriately counter the notion that there is any sort of simplistic "whole Arab nation" vs. western Christian religions. It's that sort of ignorant, uninformed ideological stance that needs to be haulted, and enlightened, because people that hold to such a dogmatic idealistic view of the world are everything that's wrong with it, and here's why.
That view, and any seemingly similar view of any other, takes a large socioeconomic picture that includes international factions and local national postering by various governing structures, each of which is motivated in turn by their own financial and moral objectives, and smears the whole multiplicity of stake holders with an inaccurate color of fundamentalist religion as their driving motivation. This is just speculation, but I bet the likelihood of people of extremely religious Christian faith being more likely to be the ones to take such an uninformed view. Not that every Christian would have such a viewpoint, I'm sure most have a better idea of the big picture for sure, but it's extremely religious Christians that spout that tainted perception of the world.
And now we reach the crux of this whole thing. What is the difference in an extreme fundamentalist Muslim and an extremely devout Christian? Objectively speaking, they both believe in a strict adherence to their faith, both feel that they and their indoctrination are the one true word of God, both feel that their faith gives them the power to thwart evil in the world, evil being anything that doesn't adhere to their specific faith... yes, there is obviously an Islamic fanaticism causing terror throughout the whole world right now. But if religious fundamentalism could've been more globally affecting in the past, it would have. It hasn't changed, it's always been there. "The Crusades" ring a bell? How many wars in history occured, how many people have died, because of a direct result of a motivation derived from a religious contradiction about what is right and wrong by God? We now as a society have the scientific capability to see the reality that facts as defined by the Genesis of almost all the major religions are a bit inaccurate. 500 years ago saying the Earth wasn't the center of the universe would get you put to death on the constitute of heresy. Galileo was incarcerated the end of his life for his observances in celestial happenings and labeled a heretic. Science has simply through objective observance extended the historical existence of Earth to billions of years from the dogmatic precep of 4000 years, give or take the ages of those people labeled in the Bible to date back to the beginning of Creation. What are all these dinosaur bones and early hominid bones that seem to fall into an extremely predictable layering of earth through annual cycles that are observable from now til the beginning of earth's actual time of creation?? The devil put it all there to fool us, right? Oh no, we simply shouldn't question God's devices and ways of things, we should just believe in the good book 'X'(you fill in the X with your specific faith's book, Quaran, Bible, whatever), and anyone who disbelieves will have to face the judgement of God... or perhaps you'll act as a vessel of God and do his bidding by trying to blow up planes, or killing abortion doctors, or simply teaching your children that science as observed through objective analysis is actually wrong because the Bible says so. There's nothing wrong with faith in a higher power. I believe it guides us, enlightens us, heals us and lifts us up. But a strict adherence to principles outlined in texts by the best definitive, logical, ethical consideration that groups of uneducated men by today's standards thousands of years ago could come up with is absolutely insane. God didn't empower us as Man to have a definitive answer in front of us. We've only the wisdom and consideration of others to help guide our own beliefs and moral considerations, and thus we should define divinity only for ourselves, and not ever attempt to impose our own personal relationship with a higher power, God, whatever or whomever you choose to call it. If mankind as a whole adhered to that one single principle, the whoooole world would be a better place. Live and Learn