Ballad Of Jack And Rose Full Movie

[Marybelle Bailey]

Doesthe movie basically suggest that incest is alright. I dont mean that in a real controversial way, the way it sounds. Basically does the movie suggest that if both daughter and father genuinely love each other, as jack and rose did, that a different relationship could occur and that that would be okay.

Thats whats so interesting about the movie. jack isnt portrayed as a monster, despite the fact our society looks down on people who practice incest.

Its interesting how Rebecca Miller doesnt really suggest that jack's behavior was wrong.

Are you serious?

Jack didn't want that sort of relationship with his daughter. It's his daughter! Most fathers don't want anyone to touch their daughter that way, let alone themselves. Jack wasn't a monster, he flipped out when Rose kissed him, obviously incest isn't on his mind.

And incest is wrong because of interbreeding. You can't just have a kid with your brother or sister without deformation. And it's not just with people, that same theory exists in the animal kingdom also.

Nothing is more powerful than beauty in a wicked world -

Amos Lee

yes it was just a kiss, but ask "normal people" on the street if fathers should kiss daughters like jack kissed rose. Most people would find that sick and disusting. Yet rebecca Miller makes no judgement.

Its an interesting idea, and probably a good reason why this movie wasnt more popular and sucessful. We tend to view people as good or bad. And most people who kiss their daughters in a romantic way arent going to be looked at by the majoroty of society, as being good human beings.

Thus my question is valid, if Jack isnt condemned for his actions in this film, which I think its pretty clear he is not condemned. Then what is the movie suggesting?

Rose many times, as I said, was trying to tell Jack that they should forget about the reaction of society to a potential love affair relationship between them. Is the movie suggesting that this is good or bad? It never really says. Which I think is both interesting and controversial. Most movies about murder make clear that murder is wrong and the bad guys are bad. This movie makes no moral judgement. jacks actions are perceived as wrong, by his own judgement, but his daughter, and the filmmaker at large refuse to take a stand that is definitively pro or con

Where does Rebecca Miller make no judgment? Jack freaked out by the way Rose kissed him (and no, it's not the other way around, she kissed him). That's how Miller explained it. What were you expecting? For the movie to stop, the director to make a small overdub about how incest is bad? Jack wanted to forget about what he'd done, what she'd done, but it was fresh in his mind so he flipped and bull-dozed the house to get rid of the memory of what had happened inside. Of course, this is my observation, Rebecca Miller might have another take on it, being that it's her movie.

Jack isn't condemned because...who would condemn him? Who is he going to tell about the incident? Why would he tell anyone in the first place? It didn't go anywhere but a 2 second kiss. Rose felt that way about him because he was basically the only adult male she had contact with, besides Grey the flower guy. It's common for daughters to be attracted to their fathers, especially for Rose because, once again, Jack was the only adult male she knew. Jack didn't want a romantic relationship with her because she's his daughter, which is why he freaked out.

Nothing is more powerful than beauty in a wicked world -

Amos Lee

I think many of you are missing some important points in the film. Yes, Rose kissed Jack. But you also see in the beginning of the film when he strokes her hair, he immediately leaves to go have sex with Kathleen, suggesting that he too, was aroused by his daughter. Maybe he didn't want to admit it to himself.

And when they kissed, he kissed her back, but immediately says, "God forgive me," meaning that he is also at fault, not just the daughter. As a final point, he invites Kathleen and her family to come live with them soon after, perhaps because he feels it's getting too dangerous for him and Rose. People will begin to question what a father and adolescent daughter are doing sequestered away in an isolated land, which is what she mentions too in a scene.

I don't think Miller is suggesting that incest is right/wrong, just that a person who prides himself in being so advanced in his thinking, can also do something "backwards" as well. And that's just like life.

It's like watching a bunch of retards trying to hump a doorknob out there!

Dodgeball

damn right I am serious. How can you not look at it that way. Incest in our society is looked at as a crime and wrong and horrible and disgusting.

Jack isnt potrayed in this movie as sick, disturbed, wrong or horrible. He made a mistake, thats evident in the movie, but it isnt viewed as being some kind of sin. Rebecca Miller didnt suggest that jack was some sinner or that he would never be forgiven or that he should be executed for his actions.

We usually look at victims of incest as being people who need help or who deserve our support. And Rose doesnt seem to mind the kiss with her father. In fact she acts like its normal.

This is a great film, and its an important movie, but lets not kid ourselves, the actions of Jack and Rose and the way Rebecca Miller presented them, are anything but "typical hollywood" stuff.

We see no resolution or judgement of jack during the movie. The anger is self directed, jack is mad at himself for going that far, but rose doesnt get mad at him for kissing her.

And it ends obviously....spoiler alert...

with him dying, and her living at a commune. We dont see any resolution to how Jacks actions should be viewed.

Obviusly jack thought what he did was wrong, almost immediately after the kiss he starts freaking out and knows what he did was wrong. But the movie doesnt portray him as a monster for it...

I think my question is actually important

a good artist doesn't tell his or her audience what to think. this is where you have to make up your own mind. even if there was insest, which i don't think is what was intended, you get to make up your own mind about that and so do i and so does every individual who sees the film. a good artist makes people think for themselves.

"the actions of Jack and Rose and the way Rebecca Miller presented them, are anything but "typical hollywood" stuff."

this is true but their actions are much too complex to simply be labeled 'insest' or 'rape'. the characters and situations are so unusual that by trying to squeez them into typical terms like those you falseify them.

there is judgment i think! it's just not maybe what you'd expect from a typical Hollywood movie.

Jack asks that Rose die with him and we are almost lead to believe she will. then there's the obvious symbolism of the snake departing the house as it is engulfed in fire. But Rose leaves through a window, like a thief in the night. She and the snake.

Is that perhaps judgment that incest is bad? That perhaps Rose as evil as a snake?

And then there's the song that says "next to me" over and over as she moves into the commune in VT. Again, like nothing happened...

Lastly, is Jack's death itself ultimate punishment?

Beauty is the eye of the beholder. As is judgment or else. The incredible thing about this film is that it leaves something to the imagination.

Just another Hollywood depiction of anti-social people being romanticised by psuedo-intellectual Hollywood liberals. It focuses more on sex/incest than the ignorance, depravity and depression that plagues people who make the wrong life choices for whatever reason. The daughter's dilemma is inherited from her libidinous self-gratifying father. It's really a story of bad parenting dressed up as a morality play! Charles Manson could have been a character in a movie like this.

cecelia_03: Hon, I will make you a bet. I bet that

proportionally FAR more incest and depravity have

occurred in the cracker-box subdivisions of the

Republican middle-class and upwards than have

ever happened, or could've happened, in the

idealistic communes that people like Jack

gave their lives to. "Libidinous"? "Self-gratifying"?

You mean like Newt G. visiting his wife being

treated for cancer in the hospital and then going

off to satiate his base, vile desires with his Beltway

trophy girl-friend? :)

I think that it is a lesson of opening oneself to the world before your time runs out. I dont think incest should be a key in looking at the true meaning of the movie rather then something actually meaningful that you can carry with you.

I have to admit I didn't watch the whole movie. I left it around the time Thad was pushed out the window. But here's what I do know: I believe Jack liked being the king of a castle he created. Many people take great pleasure in being morally right and for him, to be the last man standing from the 60s commune era, was perfect for him. It goes to show the inherent flaw in communal living: someone is going to want to be the head of it so there really are no equals.

Jack especially loved the way Rose looked at, as if he could do no wrong. Hero worship is powerful. But he realized he didn't do right by his daughter in creating such an insolated environment because she misconstrued father-daughter love with intimate, romantic love and he knows she became that way because of him. He thought he knew how society worked and could do better by Rose by keeping her so close to him when in fact exposure to the real world was exactly what she would have needed.

He didn't raise Rose to be independent of him but the opposite: she was completely dependent on him. And at first it was cute and funny when it was turned on Kathleen but when it got to be more personal, it stopped being funny.

3a8082e126